Skip
repetitive navigational links
L-Soft  -  Home of  the  LISTSERV  mailing list  manager LISTSERV(R) 14.5
Skip repetitive navigational links
Previous messageNext messagePrevious in topicNext in topicPrevious by same authorNext by same authorPrevious page (May 2003)Back to main ZNG pageJoin or leave ZNGReplyPost a new messageSearchProportional fontNon-proportional fontLog in
Date:         Fri, 23 May 2003 20:22:36 +0100
Reply-To:     "Z39.50 Next-Generation Initiative" <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       "Z39.50 Next-Generation Initiative" <[log in to unmask]>
From:         Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Re: SRW/SRU and Metasearch products
Comments: To: "Z39.50 Next-Generation Initiative" <[log in to unmask]>
Comments: cc: [log in to unmask]
In-Reply-To:  <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

> I don't know if we're all talking about the same thing. If it's > searching multiple databases *on the same server* then much of this > discussion doesn't make sense to me. Or are we talking about different > servers? .... Currently in SRW we don't have a notion of 'the same server', because we thought it was too complex (and I still think it's not useful but apparently people want it, so who am I to complain) The closest we can talk about is an endpoint that in some fashion queries multiple databases and how that endpoint might respond. Obviously for the metasearch people, this endpoint would talk directly to their underlying databases, but it could also be used to fan searches out to distributed databases as a broker/gateway/portal. > > > b) You want individual hit-counts rather than a single count, as was > > .. this looks like a killer argument against it. At least it has me > But how did you implement that in Z39.50? We developed SearchResult-1 > for this, but did anyone ever implement it? And why couldn't that be > done on an index-by-index basis same as database-by-database? I don't use multiple database queries in Z, so can't answer any of your questions =) Personally I wouldn't use it in SRW either if it was just to query homogeneous databases on the same physical machine. On the other hand, an end point to distributed databases is potentially useful for more than just saving a few processor cycles. > Yes, you can think of them -- but what are the requirements of the > metasearch products? > -- Lennie They're not very well specified. Also, why are their requirements more important than my requirements? :) If we're going to have multiple database searching, then by golly I want to be able to say how many hits came from each database, and to send different record schemas to each. Rob -- ,'/:. Rob Sanderson ([log in to unmask]) ,'-/::::. http://www.o-r-g.org/~azaroth/ ,'--/::(@)::. Special Collections and Archives, extension 3142 ,'---/::::::::::. Twin Cathedrals: telnet: liverpool.o-r-g.org 7777 ____/:::::::::::::. WWW: http://liverpool.o-r-g.org:8000/ I L L U M I N A T I


Back to: Top of message | Previous page | Main ZNG page

LISTSERV.LOC.GOV CataList email list search Powered by LISTSERV email list manager