10 messages in org.oasis-open.lists.search-ws-commentRE: [search-ws-comment]DisplayTerm //...| From | Sent On | Attachments |
|---|---|---|
| LeVan,Ralph | Oct 20, 2010 8:04 am | |
| Edo Plantinga | Oct 20, 2010 8:29 am | |
| LeVan,Ralph | Oct 20, 2010 8:54 am | |
| Edward C. Zimmermann | Oct 21, 2010 5:40 am | |
| Edo Plantinga | Oct 21, 2010 6:39 am | |
| LeVan,Ralph | Oct 21, 2010 8:21 am | |
| LeVan,Ralph | Oct 21, 2010 8:25 am | |
| Edward C. Zimmermann | Oct 21, 2010 9:11 am | |
| LeVan,Ralph | Oct 21, 2010 10:33 am | |
| Edward C. Zimmermann | Oct 21, 2010 12:10 pm |
| Subject: | RE: [search-ws-comment]DisplayTerm // Forms versus Scan and Facet // was: .... | |
|---|---|---|
| From: | LeVan,Ralph (lev...@oclc.org) | |
| Date: | Oct 21, 2010 10:33:51 am | |
| List: | org.oasis-open.lists.search-ws-comment | |
The text: "The term, exactly as it appears in the index." does not reflect our agreement on "anything goes". It must be changed to reflect our
paradigm.
I agree that we've diverged from "exactly as it appears in the index" to "anything goes". But that only argues more strongly for a displayTerm. If anything goes, then the "actualTerm" could easily be "(a and b and c and d)" with a displayTerm of "Your Favorite Authors".
I notice that our standard extensibility mechanism has been omitted from facets, so I'd like to suggest that we put <extraTermData> in.
That's OK. Get rid of DisplayTerm and you can use extraTermData in your profile to include a displayed term... I can use it for help, hints etc. As an optional element I think we all get our cake!
:-) I'll take that extraTermData! And you're right, if we conclude that displayTerm is irrelevant, then it can be carried in extraTermData.
For the purposes of parallelism, I'd be willing to add <requestURL> to the <term> in a Scan response. If the purpose of having it in facets is to make life easier for thin clients, I'd suggest that the same is true for Scan.
Agreed..
I'll take that requestURL in Scan term too! That will definitely make my life easier in my thin clients!
And how about we change the wording for value (and the optional DisplayTerm) in Scan?
As you will have seen by now, I've asked the SRU list for advice on displayTerm in Scan. If no one speaks up for it there, then I'll drop my argument and suggest that we deprecate it in Scan.
I'm a little nervous about redefining "value" in Scan responses. The values in Scan are ordered. If we conclude that "anything goes" there, then what is the ordering?
Ralph
-- This publicly archived list offers a means to provide input to the OASIS Search Web Services TC.
In order to verify user consent to the Feedback License terms and to minimize spam in the list archive, subscription is required before posting.
Subscribe: sear...@lists.oasis-open.org Unsubscribe: sear...@lists.oasis-open.org List help: sear...@lists.oasis-open.org List archive: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/search-ws-comment/ Feedback License: http://www.oasis-open.org/who/ipr/feedback_license.pdf List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php Committee: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=search-ws Join OASIS: http://www.oasis-open.org/join/