N

Function

phase

Comment (VA)

1

The design should conform to the BVA design above and this documents adds to features in the design. Where a feature is in the design but not this document it should be assumed and added. For any differences please call the author.

RS3.4

ok

2

The search term builds horizontally from drop down boxes as each entry is made

RS3.4

How about year search, using numbers "from-to"?

3

It should be possible to edit the boxes and re-submit searches.

RS3.4

Propose to have edit only for kewords/terms. FR clauses will be deleted & reinserted

4

It should be possible to delete boxes or add new ones and re-submit searches.

RS3.4

Delete will work on complete FR clauses (FR+terms); or keywords/terms (if used without FR).

If we adopt flexible Grammar, deleting/adding will be posisble only at the end

5

An entry can be either a free text search or a controlled search depending upon whether a controlled term is fully selected.

For example a user could input “cotton” AND ‘cotton’ to search both free text and material controlled term

RS3.4

Bad example: the keyword would also find the term, so the term is sueprfluous. Better example: "cotton and Canvas [Material]" where the first is a keyword, the second a term.

6

Terminology items will be identified by the thesaurus they originate from e.g.

Glass (object)

Glass (material)

RS3.4

Ok. thesaurus Type should be always on-screen, to indicate this is a Term search, and different from Keyword search

7

All dropdown items will have scope notes in boxes that appear on a mouse over (tooltip) .

·                   Terminology – will have the thesauri title and the scope note

·                   Boolean operators - will have a definition and an example

·                   WHICH – will have a definition and an example

·                   Relationships will provide examples based on the predicates that they are aggregating

RS3.4

·                   Term: if we have additional details (e.g. rdfs:comment): there aren't any in RKD thesauri.

·                   Boolean: is it really necessary to explain what AND/OR mean?

·                   WHICH: I still don't understand what it is for, and imho nobody has explained it clearly. Why can't the user just select the FR? I think it's a parasitic word and not needed

·       FR: And most of all to define it (e.g. the definition of Thing From Place is several sentences!)

8

Intelligent Sentences. The search sentence will only provide relationships that apply to the subject that has just been entered.

?

Let's discuss. Eg if I enter term "The Hague [Place]", what should happen? Should it prepend a box with relations "any" (default), "from place", "about place"??

9

It should be possible to add a thumbnail image to scope note to illustrate the term. Therefore it should be possible in some later configuration to associate representative images to thesauri terms

RS4

No images in RKD/BM thesauri, AFAIK

10

When the term is selected the next box in the sentence appears

RS3.4

Yes, there's no need for the user to enter AND since that's the only top-level connective

11

A controlled term or free text word is always followed by a box to “refine“

??

"Refine" what? Describe in detail how this would work

12

A WHICH is always followed by a “define” which has a drop down of relationships supported by that part of the search sentence

In RS3 all FRs will be about Thing so all apply all the time. I don't see the need for WHICH

13

Only authority files / thesauri that are support by the relationship should be available on the next autocomplete box

RS3.4

Ok. Each FR should know its range: Thesaurus Type(s) or Date Range

14

If there is a Boolean limitation for OR’s then only controlled terms from the same thesaurus as the connected term will be available for auto-complete

RS3.4

Yes: in OR the FR stays the same

15

The Boolean AND can be used with terminology from any Authority

RS3.4

After AND the user  enters a keyword, term, or selects a new FR that determines the thesaurus Types of the next term

16

The search settings will allow a user to change the datasets that are being searched. A user can select all available datasets, selected datasets including the project dataset. Defaults can also be set. E.g.:

Select All

Select this project

Rembrandt

Cranach

etc

RS4

The plan is to address multi-project and security features in RS3.5.

But we need to define "data set" since the spec talks about graphs (data spaces) and there are only 2 from the viewpoint of a given project: shared and project space.

Need to decide what we use Named Graphs for.

Need to define what happens when data is annotated then changed inside a project

17

The search settings should be able to include external semantic sources. (Another Museum Endpoint, Dbpedia…)

Note: The relationship mapper functionality will probably need to incorporate external taxonomies

RS4

Out of RS3 scope, but IMHO very important for RS4 since we want to leverage available resources: Wikipedia, LOD (including DBpedia, FreeBase), and anything else found through Google.

E.g. SEMLIB (see Related projects) allows Annotation based on either internal thesauri, or external sources like FreeBase, and leverages a FB search API

18

The absence of an object type denotes any object

RS3.4

Clear (and no need to say it)

19

Search results should be displayed with an image and summary metadata (Currently, Title, maker/artist, date, location, material, technique ).

RS3.4

Need to define "Display Fields":

·       Universally across CIDOC objects (in RSO extension ontology)

·       As specialized (subset) FRs

·       including Main Image

20

Display Fields should be configurable: select from the main metadata fields and we should be able to draw from a larger list.

A dropdown with the field possibilities should be available and provide multi-selection.

You should also be able to turn all metadata text off. See also map and timeline functionality.

RS4

What other fields do you contemplate beoynd the ones mentioned above?

Then let's see how we can define them universally across CIDOC objects

21

It should be possible to filter results with facets. (Note that design only presents core concept facets).  We should be able to make use of other controlled authorities (material, culture, etc – see the annex 2 – when available). An example is the Finnish site at p.62 of the Business Requirements ( www.museosuomi.fi )

RS3.5?

Exhibit handles the faceting.

Do we need to transfer selected facets into the Search (i.e. a Refine Search operation), forming an AND/OR FR search?

Will facets coincide with FRs?

22

It should be possible to select items in the summary results pages for inclusion in the data basket (copy & link)

RS3.4

Link is clear. But what's Copy?

23

It should be possible to select a summary result list and click through to see the object ( full details ) . (Note: we currently only have the data annotation tool that does this and we will need to implement a non research tool detailed results page with a similar design)

RS3.4

(Not sure what you mean: after Search you can also see the object details)

24

Configuration should be available to change the relationship terms to other more meaningful terms (masks)

What do you mean by terms/masks?

.

For example: “From” could refer to relationships that are not obvious to the user.

??

Do we want to create divergence by letting people give their own "translations" of FRs? I think this goes against CIDOC's desire for standardization/ unification.

If we show them the scope notes, they'll quickly learn the FRs.

25

Saving the Search should provide a dialogue box that allows the search to be named and for a description for the search.

RS3.4/5

Need to define ontology for searches mechanism to save them in RDF, and be able to put them in Basket

26

Note on Time line and GeoMap Functions: These features will need to be fully specified as applications in their own right and additional specifications will be required. Only features relevant to search functionality are described in this document.

For search these plug-ins should simply be seen as a view replacing the standard summary thumbnail review but with some additional contextual user controls.

RS3.1

RS4

Timeline: available since RS3.1.

GeoMap: requires a mapping from RKD/BM Places to GeoNames, or another mechanism to provide coordinates (see App4 for discussion)

27

The user should be able to switch to a timeline or map view (and been

??

these views) which provides a visualisation but has the same functionality as the standard results screen, e.g. selection, facet filtering, presentation of metadata fields etc.

The exhibit plug-in simply replaces the thumbnail view but all other features are retained with some additional exhibit controls.

RS3.1

Yes, Exhibit accomplishes this

28

The plotted results should have the same summary information as the standard results screen and click provide a popup box with the thumbnail and additional selection functions as in the main results screen. (The popup is effectively providing the same as the thumbnail results for adding to the data basket etc ) . Clicking on a result plotted on a timeline or map should provide result in a view of the objects details as a popup similar to the thumbnail view on the standard search screen. 

RS3.1

ok. Please reword to remove redundancy

29

Timeline results Mapping: Should allow the user to change the time line scale (days, months, weeks, years – on two levels

RS3.1

Yes, Exhibit accomplishes this

30

Time line and Map data representation: The object should be represented by a suitable marker similar to that in Google Maps.

RS3.4

31

Text next to the marker should be configurable by the user and default to the object title. A dropdown with the field possibilities should be available and provide multi-selection.

It should be possible to turn text on and off.              

RS3.5?

Jana?

32

Geo Results Mapping: Should allow zooming into particular parts off the map.

RS4

33

Individual results can be saved to the data basket as they can on the main results screen.

RS3.4

34

Explore Refin e – The search sentence should allow the user to change the parameters to alter the results. This should include the ability to;

·                   Replace terms with different ones, for example replacing Rembrandt with Flinck

·                   Add additional search criteria, for example add Flinck so that the search is for Rembrandt OR Flinck or Rembrandt AND Flinck.

·                   Remove criteria

RS3.4

Please merge with 3,4

35

Use a result as a basis for exploring. For example a result could be used as a root for finding other items based on relationships with different metadata fields.

For example TODO: The results may have found various objects some of which were created by a particular person

RS3.5?

(Called "Related Results" in the intro).

I think this is very similar to "Refine Search" described above, but uses a single object instead of the selected facets.

Should we use all facet values of the object, or only the lowest-level, or what?

36

Results are paginated and the user must use a paging system. (Presented in rows with paging for large result sets.)

In the Time Line and Map views all results are plotted but the user can change the scales or specify a limited result. (Top 50 / 100 etc)

RS 3.1, RS 4

RS3 uses Exhibit2 for result-set presentation and supports the first 1k results.

RS4 can leverage Exhibit3 (yet another server) to support 100k results.

Various views are supported (rows, thumbnails= lighbox).