[Kim-discussion] Issue with getEntites method in CoreDBApi

[DanKo]

Issue with getEntites method in CoreDBApiHi Alistar,

I consulted with my coleagues and came to the following work-around solution:

1) Call getDocuments(CoreDbQuery query) and collect the document IDs as a set.
2) Then intersect you set of DocIDs with the retrieved one.
3) Then call getEntities(Set docIds) with the resulting set of documents.

Other solution - if applicable - could be to add your metadata as additional KIMDocument features. This will allow to get the whole result in one combined search.

Greetings!
DanKo

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: alistair.duke at bt.com 
  To: danko at sirma.bg 
  Cc: kim-discussion at ontotext.com 
  Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 6:09 PM
  Subject: RE: [Kim-discussion] Issue with getEntites method in CoreDBApi


  Hi Danko,

  Thanks for the speedy reply.

  The scenario is as follows. I'm running a query which specifies constraints based on structured metadata associated with the documents (this metadata is held outside of KIM in a simple database table). This results in a set of documents which satisfy the query. Since I associated the KIM docIds with these documents at index time, I want to send the resulting KIM docids to KIM to give me the top occuring organisations, people, etc (rather like the default CORE interface) in that result set. The getEntites query seemed like an ideal way to achieve this in one step.

  I suppose an alternative would be to use

  ResultSetIterator getEntities(Set docIds) 

  to get all entities and then build some sort of filter to sort the results into organisations, people, etc but this seems rather clunky in comparison. Is there a better way?

  Thanks,

  Alistair

  Alistair Duke
  Next Generation Web Research 
  Centre for Information & Security Systems Research 
  BT Innovate & Design
  ___________________________
  Office: +44(0) 1473 608192
  Mobile: +44(0) 7730 426257
  Fax : +44(0) 1473 606755
  Email: alistair.duke at bt.com
  This email contains BT information, which may be privileged or confidential.
  It's meant only for the individual(s) or entity named above. If you're not the intended
  recipient, note that disclosing, copying, distributing or using this information
  is prohibited. If you've received this email in error, please let me know immediately
  on the email address above. Thank you.
  We monitor our email system, and may record your emails. 
  British Telecommunications plc
  Registered office: 81 Newgate Street London EC1A 7AJ
  Registered in England no: 1800000 




----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    From: DanKo [mailto:danko at sirma.bg] 
    Sent: 05 August 2009 16:00
    To: Duke,AK,Alistair,DER3 R
    Cc: kim-discussion at ontotext.com
    Subject: Re: [Kim-discussion] Issue with getEntites method in CoreDBApi


    Hi Alistar,

    It happens so that from some time we do not support the:
      getEntities(Set docIds, CoreDbQuery query)
    version of the method. It just redirects the execution to:
      getEntities(CoreDbQuery query)
    not to break old implementations.
    It was our oversight that we didn't remarked it in the documentation.

    But you can share the querying scenario you try to implements and we will help with it.

    Greetings,
    DanKo

      ----- Original Message ----- 
      From: alistair.duke at bt.com 
      To: kim-discussion at ontotext.com 
      Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 2:55 PM
      Subject: [Kim-discussion] Issue with getEntites method in CoreDBApi


      Hi again, 

      I've found some strange behaviour when using the getEntities method of the CoreDbApi. If I use the 

      ResultSetIterator getEntities(Set docIds) 

      form it works fine i.e. I just get the entities in the documents defined in the set. However, if I use the 

      ResultSetIterator getEntities(Set docIds, CoreDbQuery query) 
      form, it only seems to look at the query restrictions and ignores the docid restrictions. This means I get all entites regardless of whether they are in the specified documents or not.

      I'm using KIM 2.5. Is this something you've come across? 

      Thanks, 

      Alistair 

      Alistair Duke
      Next Generation Web Research 
      Centre for Information & Security Systems Research 
      BT Innovate & Design
      ___________________________
      Office: +44(0) 1473 608192
      Mobile: +44(0) 7730 426257
      Fax : +44(0) 1473 606755
      Email: alistair.duke at bt.com
      This email contains BT information, which may be privileged or confidential.
      It's meant only for the individual(s) or entity named above. If you're not the intended
      recipient, note that disclosing, copying, distributing or using this information
      is prohibited. If you've received this email in error, please let me know immediately
      on the email address above. Thank you.
      We monitor our email system, and may record your emails. 
      British Telecommunications plc
      Registered office: 81 Newgate Street London EC1A 7AJ
      Registered in England no: 1800000 





--------------------------------------------------------------------------


      _______________________________________________
      Kim-discussion mailing list
      Kim-discussion at ontotext.com
      http://ontotext.com/mailman/listinfo/kim-discussion
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://ontotext.com/pipermail/kim-discussion/attachments/20090806/06a163a9/attachment-0002.html>