> > The bottom line, then is that if we define cql.anywhere properly, we
> > don't need the excludeOriginInfo modifier.
> But what if originInfo is searchable? (Or partially searchable, e.g.
> placeOfOrigin is searchable.)
Ahhh, I think I understand your point. I assume you mean something like
"What if originInfo is one of the searchable indices? Then, the
definition of cql.anywhere would force it to be searched along with the
other indices, regardless of whether it is useful for keyword
searching." (Let me know if I'm misunderstanding.)
I'm a big fan of making the most common case as easy as possible. Most
commonly, searchers will want to "do the Google", putting in a set of
terms and getting back the "right" results. As it stands, the only
"easy" way to do this in CQL is to use cql.serverChoice, and hope that
the server has defined it as a keyword index. But cql.serverChoice is
supposed to serve as a proxy for some other index, so we still need a
way to explicitly search over keywords. I see three options:
1) Redefine cql.anywhere to search "all useful keywords" rather than
"all available indices". I would be in favor of this, because I don't
see a great need for searching over "all available indices" when the
owner of the server has determined that some subset of the indices is
more useful for keyword searches.
2) Add a bib.keywords index (or cql.keywords?), and note how it differs
from cql.anywhere. This is reasonable, but may be confusing.
3) Follow along with the current bib proposal, adding "keywordsOnly" to
the type modifier. I don't like this option, because requiring use of a
modifier makes query construction more difficult, and most users will
never figure it out.
---- Ryan Scherle
---- Digital Library Program
---- Indiana University