[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [help-GIFT] Re: Region query for MRML/GIFT

From: Wolfgang Müller
Subject: Re: [help-GIFT] Re: Region query for MRML/GIFT
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 21:24:03 +0100

Dear Pruet,

I appreciate a lot our discussion, and I would like to emphasize that anyone 
is welcome to participate.

I guess we are still getting repercussions of my initial misunderstanding. I 
know it sounds silly, but could you make available your initial DIA file 
*and* the current version, and I look at both versions again? I think most of 
my misunderstanding is that when reading segment query I was thinking of 
query-by-segment and I still could not get this out of my head even when you 
rectified it. Sorry for that.

Now trying to recall what I have seen of the first version you showed to me, 
and the later ones, I think it might be good to separate two things:

i) query by segment: here the query as well as the result should be 
syntactically as close to the "normal" query by example as possible, as I 
outlined in previous mails. This means a syntax like your example from your 
last mail:

            <query-result-element-segment segment-id="1">
            </query-result-element-segment >

ii) a simple lookup, where for one image you request more info. In your case 
these are segments. And all the time we have been talking about segment. Why 
not use general image or document info? I think this could be useful for all 
kind of meta data. Could you try modify the "get-segments-by-url"-like syntax 
into something that uses a common tag for similar things like image size, 
etc.? I imagine the results be presented like in the example above, but with 
some tags (also at the second level) indicating that the result is the result 
of a get-image-info query rather than a normal query result.

To sketch this out further I would think about a 

get-document-info tag (you specify in some attributes what image info [e.g. 
segments] you would like to have)

and as the response a


tag (I believe that's quite close to your initial suggestion). People will 
find out in parsing that there is a segment inside.

What do you think about this, would you agree to fleshing this out a bit? 
Please note that this is not a criticism on your work (especially note again 
that we are getting closer back to your initial suggestion), but rather an 
encouragement to make it more reusable.

I will be away from mail the rest of this week, and I am looking forward to 
finding your suggestions on this list next week.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]