Actually, yes, that is the gist of it. Not overly happy with the need to
resort to extraRequest/extraResponseData, but I already feared that
would be the conclusion of it all. As to the suggestion to solve things
client side: the idea was in fact to resolve as much as possible in our
server thus moving as much as possible common functionality to a common
Van: SRU (Search and Retrieve Via URL) Implementors [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Namens Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress
Verzonden: woensdag 16 augustus 2006 23:15
Aan: [log in to unmask]
Onderwerp: Re: Functionality mapping?
What am I missing here? Unless I'm oversimplifying, it seems that what
want is to do a query like "title=rabbit" and then get a summary
(number of titles) by author.
The summary could be requested and returned via
Or let the client do it. Search "title=rabbit", sort on author, define
element set (i.e. schema) that consists of author only, retrieve the
result set according to that schema, and let the client create the
Or retrieve the first N records (100, 1000, ...) create a summary from
those, then see if the user wants the next N records.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Taylor" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 12:13 PM
Subject: Functionality mapping?
> Erwin Wessels writes:
> > - The scan operation allows for (a.o.) hit-count information, but
> > only for a term in a specific index. How could we retrieve the
> > hitcount for a particular search string for *multiple* index fields
> > separately?
> What's wrong with multiple scans -- one for each such index?
> Or if you want the aggregate number of hits for your search-terms
> across all relevant indexes, then define an index which is the union
> of those indexes, and scan on that.
> > - Drill-down enabling information: information on hit counts for
> > refining for (possibly) indicated indexes.
> > In other words, functionally speaking, I'm looking for the
> > refinement options when searching for title 'rabbit', for the index
> > 'author' and a maximum records it would tell me 'Potter, Beatrix'
> > (105 results), 'Wells, Rosemary' (63 results), 'Carroll, Lewis' (41
> > results), and 954 more refinements.
> To do this, I think you need "scan within result-set", which is not
> supported in the SRU protocol. The most economical way to provide
> access to such functionality in an underlying database would be to
> make an extension, using an <extraRequestInfo> element in SRW and an
> equivalent x-Whatever parameter in SRU, to tell the server the name of
> the result-set that you want it to scan.
> /o ) \/ Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
> )_v__/\ "The fighting must begin before another someone dies" --
> Blackmore's Rainbow, _16th Century Greensleeves_. Eh?
Dit bericht (met bijlagen) is met grote zorgvuldigheid samengesteld. Voor mogelijke onjuistheid en/of onvolledigheid van de hierin verstrekte informatie kan Kennisnet geen aansprakelijkheid aanvaarden, evenmin kunnen aan de inhoud van dit bericht (met bijlagen) rechten worden ontleend. De inhoud van dit bericht (met bijlagen) kan vertrouwelijke informatie bevatten en is uitsluitend bestemd voor de geadresseerde van dit bericht. Indien u niet de beoogde ontvanger van dit bericht bent, verzoekt Kennisnet u dit bericht te verwijderen, eventuele bijlagen niet te openen en wijst Kennisnet u op de onrechtmatigheid van het gebruiken, kopiŽren of verspreiden van de inhoud van dit bericht (met bijlagen).
This message (with attachments) is given in good faith. Kennisnet cannot assume any responsibility for the accuracy or reliability of the information contained in this message (with attachments), nor shall the information be construed as constituting any obligation on the part of Kennisnet. The information contained in this message (with attachments) may be confidential or privileged and is only intended for the use of the named addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are requested by Kennisnet to delete this message (with attachments) without opening it and you are notified by Kennisnet that any disclosure, copying or distribution of the information contained in this message (with attachments) is strictly prohibited and unlawful.