- From: LeVan,Ralph <levan@oclc.org>
- Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2003 16:29:57 -0400
- To: "'Kevin Gamiel'" <kgamiel@cnidr.org>
- Cc: "ZIG Mailing List (E-mail)" <www-zig@w3.org>
Result sets exist because every reference service from time immemorial provided them. The logic being that it is cheaper to refine a result set than to redo the original search with an extra term in it. Result sets are NOT databases. The model claims that they are reasonably static. Databases are not static. Ralph -----Original Message----- From: Kevin Gamiel [mailto:kgamiel@cnidr.org] Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2003 9:23 AM To: www-zig@w3.org Subject: Model question Hi folks, A discussion has come up on our GridIR list (http://www.gridir.org) about models. To aid that discussion, I have a question about the Z39.50 model. The search service provides a method for applying a query expression "directly" against a set of databases (DB), generating a logical, server-side result set (RS). The present service provides a method for retrieval of records from a RS. The RS is *not* modelled directly as a DB, that is, the search service may not use an RS directly as if it were a DB. However, type-1 and type-101 queries (at least), allow one to include an RS reference as an operand, *effectively* turning an RS into a DB, though with some (minor?) loss of functionality. Was including an RS as a query operand a clever afterthought to avoid changing the underlying data model, or is there a more significant reason to maintain the DB/RS model distinction? Thanks! Kevin -- Kevin Gamiel <kgamiel@cnidr.org> MCNC Center for Networked Information Discovery and Retrieval (CNIDR) http://www.mcnc.org http://www.cnidr.org
Received on Saturday, 26 July 2003 16:30:00 UTC