100 lines
3.1 KiB
Plaintext
100 lines
3.1 KiB
Plaintext
|
All three types of searches would still be possible according to the parameters used, and the custom search would use XML schema instead of a simplified structure representation.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
A full document search would look like:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<verbatim>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<search>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<responseStructrure ns="http://www.tdwg.org/schemas/abcd/1.0"></responseStructrure>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
</search>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
</verbatim>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Implying that the responseStructure schema is a conceptual schema accepted by the provider.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
A partial document search would look like:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<verbatim>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<search>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<responseStructrure ns="http://www.tdwg.org/schemas/abcd/1.0"></responseStructrure>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<concepts>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<concept path="/datasets/dataset/units/unit/identification"/>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
</concepts>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
</search>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
</verbatim>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Also implying that the responseStructure schema is a conceptual schema accepted by the provider. In this case all mandatory elements from the response schema would be returned, including the additional concepts specified.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
The custom search would also use an XML schema to specify the response structure, but now this schema would not be a conceptual schema accepted by the provider:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<verbatim>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<search>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<responseStructrure ns="http://www.mydomain.org/myschema/1.0">http://www.mydomain.org/myschema/1.0/myschema.xsd</responseStructrure>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<mapping xmlns:abcd="http://www.tdwg.org/schemas/abcd/1.0">
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<concept>
|
||
|
|
<from path="Taxon/@FullName" SearchRequestProposalTwo>
|
||
|
|
<to path="abcd:/datasets/dataset/units/unit/identification/scientificname" SearchRequestProposalTwo>
|
||
|
|
</concept>
|
||
|
|
<concept>
|
||
|
|
<from path="Taxon/@HigherTaxon" SearchRequestProposalTwo>
|
||
|
|
<to path="abcd:/datasets/dataset/units/unit/highertaxon" SearchRequestProposalTwo>
|
||
|
|
</concept>
|
||
|
|
<concept>
|
||
|
|
<from path="Taxon/Coordinates/@lat" SearchRequestProposalTwo>
|
||
|
|
<to path="abcd:/datasets/dataset/units/unit/latitude" SearchRequestProposalTwo>
|
||
|
|
</concept>
|
||
|
|
<concept>
|
||
|
|
<from path="Taxon/Coordinates/@long" SearchRequestProposalTwo>
|
||
|
|
<to path="abcd:/datasets/dataset/units/unit/longitude" SearchRequestProposalTwo>
|
||
|
|
</concept>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
</mapping>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
</search>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
</verbatim>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
However it would give the provider the necessary mappings to produce the results.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
A custom search could also accept a list of concepts (as the partial search).
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Providers could cache the mappings to speed up responses (should we also include a "useCache" attribute?)
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Note: The recordDefinition elements would still be necessary here!
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
The custom schema above could look like:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<verbatim>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<element name="Taxon" maxOccurs="unbounded">
|
||
|
|
<complexType>
|
||
|
|
<attribute name="FullName" type="xsd:string" use="required"/>
|
||
|
|
<attribute name="HigherTaxon" type="xsd:string"/>
|
||
|
|
<sequence>
|
||
|
|
<element name="Coordinates" maxOccurs="unbounded">
|
||
|
|
<complexType>
|
||
|
|
<sequence>
|
||
|
|
<element name="lat" type="xsd:string" use="required" SearchRequestProposalTwo>
|
||
|
|
<element name="long" type="xsd:string" use="required" SearchRequestProposalTwo>
|
||
|
|
</sequence>
|
||
|
|
</complexType>
|
||
|
|
</sequence>
|
||
|
|
</complexType>
|
||
|
|
</element>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
</verbatim>
|