LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ZNG Archives


ZNG Archives

ZNG Archives


ZNG@C4VLPLISTSERV01.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ZNG Home

ZNG Home

ZNG  August 2002

ZNG August 2002

Subject:

Re: Indexes

From:

"Larry E. Dixson" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Z39.50 Next-Generation Initiative

Date:

Thu, 22 Aug 2002 11:23:00 -0400

Content-Type:

TEXT/PLAIN

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

TEXT/PLAIN (88 lines)

Posting for Janifer Gatenby -- LED

-----Original Message-----

>>> The problem I'm having is that I no longer remember how we thought we
>>> could distinguish between "first-characters-in-field" and
>>> "first-words-in-field" searches in Bath.  In other words, what would
>>>
>>> Were we specifying the "firstWords" search with proximity?
>>
>> My meeting notes say:
>> Left anchored is assumed.
>> Exact match is assumed
>> Unanchored begins with a question mark
>>
>> My notes do say that our prose would relate different SRW/U queries to
>> Bath searches.  We did not want specific Bath elements in the query
>> syntax.  I agree with Mike that we should not load the index names.
>
>I agree with a somewhat rambling caveat:
>
> Index Names are supposed to represent the attribute combinations in
> Z39.50.  So we can say 'titleWord' not (1=4, 3=3, 4=6)
> So we're already loading the difference between structure 1, completeness
> 1 and structure 3 completeness 6 into 'title' vs 'titleWord'
>
> I think this is an acceptable level of semantics in index names, so long
> as there is a recommendation to use one particular naming scheme (foo,
> fooWord)  Obviously this can be ignored, but so can attribute
> combinations, it just means that the searches will produce possibly
> unexpected results due to lousy configuration.
>
> titleFirstWordsIncludingLeadingArticles is a search, not an index.
> 'First' or any other description of the location of the term should be
> part of the query language, not the name of the index.  And as we can
> express it with either proximity or truncation, there's no need for it
>to be in the index.

JG:  I agree.  I don't think that this changes anything though.


> This brings me to my next questions:
>
> 1.
> Why even fooWord?  We can express it with an unanchored search with
> spaces.
>   eg:  foo="? term *"
>
> I don't think that this is sensible, but it's the logical conclusion and
> there needs to be an answer to give to it.

JG: We don't do it this way because it is harder to scan with the eye.  I
think that the above would be legal; therefore equivalent to fooword="term"


> The index name describes what is in the index. fooWord contains the
> individual words from 'foo', which implies that the server best knows
how
> to extract a 'word' from its data with respect to which normalisation
and
> extraction routines to use.  The search shouldn't have to know which
> normalisation/extraction routines are used, so there needs to be a
'word'
> index.  For first words, it does know the extraction routine -- take the
>first words in the field.   Right?
>
> 2.
> If someone searches with:
>   titleWord="search term"
>
> The agreement was to fail it, if my memory serves? As there's no single
> word which matches 'search term'?
> The search should have been titleWord="search" and titleWord="term" ?

JG:  Servers should fail it. I guess some kind servers will correct it and
also titleword="search and term".  The latter is trickier because a phrase
may have been meant.

>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

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
https://listserv.loc.gov/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0208&L=ZNG&P=6418
listserv.loc.gov
CC-MAIN-2023-14
52473
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:JSMYUK2JUMYRIYDCTD6WS237G6DG52X6
<urn:uuid:1d8e83c6-2039-4e4e-a55e-db5ee01a59f3>
2023-03-23T05:21:25Z
140.147.239.86
text/html
sha1:SC3AZN4EOX7NU34KCZDTZMAGPSS42VEB
<urn:uuid:783c0951-aa3e-4fd7-b12b-d5d6df4ce913>
https://listserv.loc.gov/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0208&L=ZNG&P=6418
response
<urn:uuid:5c218c60-dad9-4597-9893-376ad5663870>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2023-14
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for March/April 2023
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-24
software: Apache Nutch 1.19 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.4-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: https://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/