 |
 |
I am more of a reader of this group than an active participant, but I will be in North Carolina for the metasearch meeting. Ted At 09:27 AM Tuesday 04/20/04, Theo van Veen wrote: >Currently it is not easy with SRU/W to broadcast the same query to many >SRU/W servers because one has to take into account all the differences >between different servers. Especially in metasearching I think it would >be convenient when there was a possibility to send a query saying "give >me what is closest to this query" and allow different servers to respond >with a servers choice according to one or more predefined responses. The >responses could a.o. be: >1) searchRetrieveResponse >2) scanResponse >3) results of a fuzzy match >4) number of hits for different access points >5) etc. > >Without having to find out how to translate a query for different >targets such an "give me the best you can" request returns one or more >response blocks and the client can use the ones that it understands to >generate guidance to the user to improve his search. It is not the same >as the "x-scanOnSearchFail" parameter, because it can also apply to >other situations. For example when there are thousands of hits a server >could provide a response block in which it gives the number of hits for >different indexes. The client can use this to propose new searches, even >with indexes that it would not have offered otherwise. > >I remember having proposed something like this earlier and we will >implement this as a private extension. However, in the context of the >NISO metaseach meeting there may be more support for this concept. > >1) Who would support a proposal for extending SRU/SRW with such an >operation? >2) Should this be done via a new x-parameter or via a new operation? > >BTW Who of this group is attending the NISO metasearch meeting? > >Theo Ted Koppel [log in to unmask] Voice: 304-229-0100 x368 Fax: 304-229-0295 Free: 800-624-0559 The Library Corporation 1 Research Park Inwood, WV 25428