Attribute Architecture and completeness question

Hi all,

Work has pushed me off on other non-Z39.50 projects for a while, so
I may be a little out of touch. I was looking through the attribute
architecture stuff and I was a little confused.

I guess the first question is "is anyone moving towards the new attribute
architecture or should I just ignore it?"  No criticism of the work,
just wondering if its worth considering or I should just forget it.

But my real question is slightly more Bath profile related. In the
bath profile using Bib-1 you can specify searching on the full title
by using 'completeness = complete field' (I am simplifying a bit here
as bath specifies the values for all types). So I can specify right
character truncation on words (keyword search) or right trunction
on characters or at word boundaries on the complete title.

I was trying to work out how to do this with the attribute architecture.
How do I specify 'Roman Empire' as two adjacent words in a search in
a title vs 'Roman Empire' being the complete and exact title. Before
I would use the completness type to specify 'incomplete subfield' vs
'complete field'.

Going further, there are left/right truncate at word boundaries, but the
only search operators I could find in the util set assumed words.
(Adjacent Words, Any Words, All Words, Plural stem, No Stop Words etc.)
There seemed to be nothing dealing with indexing the complete value
of fields as distinct from dealing with the field as words - except
for the right truncate at word boundary which only makes sense if
indexing complete values. Does the attribute architecture support
the concept of indexing a title as both words and as a complete value?

The validity of the attribute architecture in general I am uncertain of.
Several of the pages linked from the web site (marc attribute set and
Bib-2 set) hosted at RLG are now broken links. All the documents are
dated 1999 - however there were some comments inserted dated March 2003.
Is it dead or alive? Is there a separate mailing list? Or should I forget
it and stick with the Bath 2.0 profile.

Radical opinions welcome!

Thanks!
Alan
-- 
Alan Kent (mailto:Alan.Kent@teratext.com.au, http://www.mds.rmit.edu.au/~ajk/)
Project: TeraText Technical Director (http://teratext.com.au) InQuirion Pty Ltd
Postal: Multimedia Database Systems, RMIT, GPO Box 2476V, Melbourne 3001.
Where: RMIT MDS, Bld 91, Level 3, 110 Victoria St, Carlton 3053, VIC Australia.
Phone: +61 3 9925 4114  Reception: +61 3 9925 4099  Fax: +61 3 9925 4098

Received on Wednesday, 7 May 2003 20:17:27 UTC