"Granularity" parameter in Search API -
To support #758 and complex client requirements, a search server might provide transcriptions by:
- page
- area
- paragraph
- line
- word
Clients should be able to specify the granularity for the query. #762 tells them what is supported. The new granularity parameter would work the same way as the current motivation parameter.
- The granularities need URIs and a specific type - skos:Concept (to allow narrower/broader)
- They can be aligned with other vocabularies
- They need to go in the @context
Propose defer until 1.1
Agree defer until 1.1
Now that 1.0 is out and has had some implementation experience, untagging the defer towards a potential 1.1/2.0 in 2017 in conjunction with Prezi 3.0
Proposal for extension property at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CCToyJVEr_Gq2R4GuKV5L51hwpCnC1QOYWcIuf0WU5I/edit#heading=h.mok46p7131n0
Will bring to TRC once critical path issues for 3.0 are completed.
Propose that this should be part of the extension for text granularity, and not a core search issue. Thus I think we can close it?
Published version: https://iiif.io/api/extension/text-granularity/#2-text-granularity-levels-and-the-textgranularity-property
@nfreire and @aisaac is this a new feature that you would be interested in implementing?
@glenrobson is your question about adding granularity info in the response annotations, or as a parameter in the query (i.e. that the user could want to be given only results at a certain granularity)?
The Europeana IIIF Content Search API is outputting the text granularity in the output. It appears in the annotations included in the resources field. Here is an example: https://iiif.europeana.eu/presentation/9200301/BibliographicResource_3000096102503/search?query=ano
Should this be included in Search 3.0? (thumbs up/down on the comment please)
Can this be included when Text Granularity is only an extension?
Agreed. Can the text granularity extension define an extension to the Search API?
I think it would make sense to define an extension to the Search API. But like Rob, I'm unsure if it is technically possible. Are there any other cases of extension defining additional parameters for a IIIF API? IF not, does anyone foresee a potential problem in doing so?
Do we want to include in the revised charter developing Search extensions?