So that seems to just be using the atom:category element, which is
clever, but it wouldn't give you facet counts for the total results
set (just for the returned page).
It's possible to have categories across the entire result set (they'd
be at the feed level, rather than the entry level), but you wouldn't
have any counts or links for your filtered search results and you'd
need some way to turn the "scheme" attribute into facet field,
although all of these are pretty easily achievable (they'd just really
need an XML namespace and some consensus).
Take:
<category scheme='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#kind'
term='http://schemas.google.com/books/2008#volume'/>
You could easily do something like:
<category scheme='http://example.org/facets/fields#subject'
term='History' ex:facetCount="1024"
ex:href='http://example.org/search?q=your+search&fct["subject"]=History'
/>
or whatever.
-Ross.
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 3:06 PM, Peter Murray <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> That's pretty cool, but I had to fire up Parallels on my Mac to see it in MSIE. For those that may not have Windows readily available, this is what it looks like:
>
> http://twitpic.com/45r6sn
>
>
> Peter
>
> On Mar 3, 2011, at 1:51 PM, Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
>>
>> Someone recently on this list was saying something about ways to embed
>> facets in for instance Atom feeds.
>>
>> I was reminded of that, because checking out an Atom feed from Google
>> Books Data API, in Internet Explorer... Internet Explorer displays
>> 'facet' type restrictions for it, under a heading "Filter by category".
>> It also displays sort options, apparently somehow the feed is
>> advertising it's sort options too in a way that a client like IE can act
>> upon?
>>
>> Haven't looked into the details, but here's an example feed:
>> http://books.google.com/books/feeds/volumes?q=LCCN07037314
>>
>> Look at it in IE for instance.
>>
>> So whatever's being done here is apparently already somewhat standard,
>> at least IE recognizes what Google does? I'd encourage SRU or whoever to
>> follow their lead.
>>
>> [I agree that simply copying the Solr API for a standard like SRU is not
>> the way to go -- Solr is an application that supports various low-level
>> things that are not appropriate in that level of detail for a standard
>> like SRU or what have you, at least not until they've been shown to be
>> needed.]
>
>
> --
> Peter Murray [log in to unmask] tel:+1-678-235-2955
> Ass't Director, Technology Services Development http://dltj.org/about/
> Lyrasis -- Great Libraries. Strong Communities. Innovative Answers.
> The Disruptive Library Technology Jester http://dltj.org/
> Attrib-Noncomm-Share http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/
>
|
