Date:         Sun, 10 Oct 2004 22:55:38 +0200
Reply-To:     "Z39.50 Next-Generation Initiative" <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       "Z39.50 Next-Generation Initiative" <[log in to unmask]>
From:         Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Re: Acronyms
Comments: To: [log in to unmask]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Disposition: inline

>>>> [log in to unmask] 10/08 6:23  >>>
>> Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 16:40:28 +0100
>> From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
>>
>> > I think that's _one_ of the things you'd want.  But it's very much
in
>> > the same line to want to be able to search for "dinosaur" and
find
>> > records that contains "tyrannosaurus".
>> >        fruitbat.equivalent
>> >        fruitbat.broader
>> >        fruitbat.narrower
>> > and maybe others, such as fruitbat.related.
>> > BTW., I am not claiming that "fruitbat" is necessarily the _very_
best
>> > of all possible names for this putative new set.
>>
>> I think you're being overly modest here, when what you actually
>> should be saying is:
>>
>> I am claiming that zthes is actually the right place for this new
>> stuff as it already deals with thesauri.
>>
>> Right?
>
>No, oddly enough.  As currently constituted, the Zthes context set
>        http://zthes.z3950.org/cql/
>deals only with searching a thesaurus.  But what we're trying to
>express here is searching in a target database _with the aid_ of a
>thesaurus.
>
>We _could_ expand the Zthes context set to include these attributes
as
>well, but I think it's cleaner to make a whole new set for them.
>

In addition to this it might be useful to have a field in the
searchretrieveResponse that indicates that a term occurs in a thesaurus,
so that a user can request an expansion or related terms based on the
fact that there _is_ a thesuarus term.

Theo