2011/10/28 Rupert Westenthaler <[email protected]>: > > On 27.10.2011, at 16:59, Ali Anil SINACI wrote: >>> * The Semantic Search Inteface: The Contenthub currently defines it's own >>> query API (supports keyword based search as well as "field -> value" like >>> constraints, supports facets). The LMF directly exposes the RESTful API of >>> the semantic Solr index. I strongly prefer the approach of the LMF, because >>> the two points already described above. >> >> We think that we do not have to make a selection here. We can keep a simple >> wrap-up on the Solr interface (contenthub's own query API) while providing >> the Solr RESTful API as is. IMO a wrap-up on Solr interface would be >> beneficial. On the other hand, in this interface we try to make use of an >> ontology to be used in OntologyResourceSearchEngine. This might help to >> figure out new keywords based on the subsumption hierarchy inside the >> ontology. However, I think this may lead to performance issues and may not >> be useful at all. We can decide on this later. > > You forgot to mention one additional advantage for using the Solr RESTful > API: If we do that one could create the Semantic Index and than copy it over > to some other SolrServer without the need to run Stanbol directly on the > production infrastructure.
+1 > In general I would suggest to first focus the discussion on the unique > features we would like to provide with the Semantic Search component. I > already included three features I would like to have in my first Mail (Query > preprocessing, Entity Facets, Semantic Facets). As you now mention the > OntologyResourceSearchEngine is very relevant in relation to such features. > However adding such features must not necessarily mean to create an own query > language. One could also try to add such features directly to Solr by > implementing some Solr extensions. +1 By avoiding adding a yet a new HTTP layer for basic Solr queries we will make it possible for CMS that already have Solr integration (and they are numerous) to leverage the "smart" stanbol semantic indexing without having to change a single line of code in their Solr connector. That would be great for adoption. Off course we might still want to develop adtional HTTP endpoints for things that are not covered by the default Solr API and further add a JSON-LD response serializer but that should prevent the users to directly call the raw Solr API if they decide to do so. -- Olivier http://twitter.com/ogrisel - http://github.com/ogrisel
