LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ZNG Archives


ZNG Archives

ZNG Archives


[email protected]


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Monospaced Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ZNG Home

ZNG Home

ZNG  August 2006

ZNG August 2006

Subject:

Re: Functionality mapping?

From:

Erwin Wessels <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

SRU (Search and Retrieve Via URL) Implementors

Date:

Tue, 29 Aug 2006 13:22:33 +0200

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (89 lines)

Hi,

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
location.

Thanks,

-E

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
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
we
want is to do a query like "title=rabbit" and then get a summary
breakdown
(number of titles) by author.

The summary could be requested and returned via
extraRequest/extraResponseData.

Or let the client do it. Search "title=rabbit", sort on author, define
an
element set (i.e. schema) that consists of author only, retrieve the
whole
result set according to that schema, and let the client create the
summary.
Or retrieve the first N records (100, 1000, ...) create a summary from
those, then see if the user wants the next N records.

--Ray

----- 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]>
http://www.miketaylor.org.uk
> )_v__/\ "The fighting must begin before another someone dies" --
Ritchie
> Blackmore's Rainbow, _16th Century Greensleeves_. Eh?


DISCLAIMER:

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.

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

July 2017
October 2016
July 2016
August 2014
February 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
February 2013
January 2013
October 2012
August 2012
April 2012
January 2012
October 2011
May 2011
April 2011
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager