simple search api (was Re: mimetype standardisation by testsets)

[Jean-Francois Dockes]

As an afterthought to my previous message (sorry), the result list could
change if the query has to be re-run. This is a good reason for keeping the
uris as document identifiers for getSnippets().

jf

Jean-Francois Dockes writes:
 > Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen writes:
 >  > 2006/12/19, Jean-Francois Dockes <jean-francois.dockes at wanadoo.fr>:
 > Ok, so you don't request "Snippet" as a property in the initial query, and
 > re-call Query() with the appropriate record number, requesting the
 > "Snippet" property for the record you want the Snippet for. If getting a
 > snippet is slow and costly, using a dbus transaction for it should not be an
 > issue.
 > 
 > Or if you really want to, you could define a call requesting snippets for a
 > list of result numbers. All I'm saying is that 'URI' is not a good result
 > identifier. 
 > 
 >  > These was the reasons why I split the methods like I did and I still think
 >  > they hold...
 > 
 > My central point is that 'URI' is not a good result identifier. Results are
 > not organized by URI either on the application or backend side. The result
 > list is an ordered sequence, the natural accessor is the number in the
 > sequence.
 > 
 > Regards,
 > J.F. Dockes