Yep, what Bill said, I have had thoughts of extending it to other types 
of input too, it was part of my original design goals.

In particular, I was thinking of extending it to arbitrary XML.

Unlike MARC, there are many other options for indexing XML into Solr 
(assuming that's your end goal), so you may or may not find traject to 
be better than those, although for myself there might be some benefit in 
using the same tool accross formats too.

There are a number of built-in 'macros' that are MARC-specific; you 
wouldn't use those. And might need some others that are, say, 
XML-specific. (Probably just a single one, extract_xpath, for XML).

Same could be done for MODS, sure -- or you could handle MODS with a 
(hypothetical) generic XML setup.

But yeah, if you want to take input records, and transform them into 
hash-like data structures -- I was thinking from the start of 
structuring traject to support such use cases, yep. (If you want to go 
to something other than a hash-like data structure, well, it might still 
be possible, but it's straying from traject's target a bit more).

[Oh, and I just made up 'traject'. I was looking for a word (made up or 
real) not already being used for any popular software, and thinking 
about 'projections' in the sense of mathematical transformations; and 
about 'trajectory' in the sense of things sent through outer space, with 
the Solr/Solar connection. I actually had originally decided to call it 
"transject", but then accidentally wrote "traject" when I created the 
github project, and then figured that was easier to pronounce and write 

On 10/15/13 1:02 PM, Bill Dueber wrote:
> 'traject' means "to transmit" (e.g., "trajectory") -- or at least it did,
> when people still used it, which they don't.
> The traject workflow is incredibly general: *a reader* sends *a record* to *an
> indexing routine* which stuffs...stuff...into a context object which is
> then sent to *a writer*. We have a few different MARC readers, a few useful
> writers (one of which, obviously, is the solr writer), and a bunch of
> shipped routines (which we're calling "macros" but are just well-formed
> ruby lambda or blocks) for extracting and transforming common MARC data.
> [see
> more explanation and some examples]
> But there's no reason why a reader couldn't produce a MODS record which
> would then be worked on. I'm already imagining readers and writers that
> target databases (RDBMS or NoSQL), or a queueing system like Hornet, etc.
> If there are people at Stanford that want to talk about how (easy it is) to
> extend traject, I'd be happy to have that conversation.
> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 12:28 PM, Tom Cramer <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> ++ Jonathan and Bill.
>> 1.) Do you have any thoughts on extending traject to index other types of
>> data--say MODS--into solr, in the future?
>> 2.) What's the etymology of 'traject'?
>> - Tom
>> On Oct 14, 2013, at 8:53 AM, Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
>>> Jonathan Rochkind (Johns Hopkins) and Bill Dueber (University of
>> Michigan), are happy to announce a robust, feature-complete beta release of
>> "traject," a tool for indexing MARC data to Solr.
>>> traject, in the vein of solrmarc, allows you to define your indexing
>> rules using simple macro and translation files. However, traject runs under
>> JRuby and is "ruby all the way down," so you can easily provide additional
>> logic by simply requiring ruby files.
>>> There's a sample configuration file to give you a feel for traject[1].
>>> You can view the code[2] on github, and easily install it as a (jruby)
>> gem using "gem install traject".
>>> traject is in a beta release hoping for feedback from more testers prior
>> to a 1.0.0 release, but it is already being used in production to generate
>> the HathiTrust (metadata-lookup) Catalog (
>> traject was developed using a test-driven approach and has undergone both
>> continuous integration and an extensive benchmarking/profiling period to
>> keep it fast. It is also well covered by high-quality documentation.
>>> Feedback is very welcome on all aspects of traject including
>> documentation, ease of getting started, features, any problems you have,
>> etc.
>>> What we think makes traject great:
>>> * It's all just well-crafted and documented ruby code; easy to program,
>> easy to read, easy to modify (the whole code base is only 6400 lines of
>> code, more than a third of which is tests)
>>> * Fast. Traject by default indexes using multiple threads, so you can
>> use all your cores!
>>> * Decoupled from specific readers/writers, so you can use ruby-marc or
>> marc4j to read, and write to solr, a debug file, or anywhere else you'd
>> like with little extra code.
>>> * Designed so it's easy to test your own code and distribute it as a gem
>>> We're hoping to build up an ecosystem around traject and encourage
>> people to ask questions and contribute code (either directly to the project
>> or via releasing plug-in gems).
>>> [1]
>>> [2]