Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add hierarchical facets support #680

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jan 13, 2015

Conversation

jonescc
Copy link
Contributor

@jonescc jonescc commented Nov 17, 2014

@jonescc jonescc force-pushed the add-hierarchical-facets-to-core branch from 73da350 to e49e6fb Compare November 17, 2014 06:01
@Delawen
Copy link
Contributor

Delawen commented Dec 9, 2014

@jonescc this pull request it no longer mergeable.

I am not sure what this does refer to, maybe a more descriptive text will be helpful here?

@jonescc
Copy link
Contributor Author

jonescc commented Dec 9, 2014

Refer proposal at https://github.com/geonetwork/core-geonetwork/wiki/201411HierarchicalFacetSupport. I'll fix up the merge problems shortly. As I understand it, this has been approved for inclusion.

@jonescc jonescc changed the title Merge in IMOS hierarchical facets support Add hierarchical facets support Jan 12, 2015
@jonescc
Copy link
Contributor Author

jonescc commented Jan 13, 2015

Merge conflicts resolved.

@jesseeichar
Copy link

+1 looks good. well tested nicely designed.

Only comment otherwise is to others. This might take a migration step to work with existing systems. I haven't tested that aspect yet but it is a possibility. I would love to merge but I would like to get the ok from @fxprunayre first.

@fxprunayre
Copy link
Member

It looks good to me, the config is slightly different but could be easily updated for existing systems manually I think. The client side is from what I understood not affected by that change so +1 for merge. And it's probably better to merge it now if we want to stabilize develop branch in the coming weeks for GN3.

@jesseeichar
Copy link

I will also create a branch off of refactor_search with this merged onto it.

jesseeichar pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 13, 2015
@jesseeichar jesseeichar merged commit e8c3234 into geonetwork:develop Jan 13, 2015
fxprunayre pushed a commit to fxprunayre/core-geonetwork that referenced this pull request Aug 6, 2015
Hierarchical facet support was added in geonetwork#680
providing server code to handle facet hierarchy based on thesaurus broader relations.

This commit add the client side support for it, which means:
* add directive to handle facet response using the dimension format ie.
 * example for flat facet
```
<summary count="3949" type="local">
  <dimension name="type" label="types">
    <category value="dataset" label="Dataset" count="3043"/>
    <category value="series" label="Series" count="408"/>
...
```
 * example for hierachical facet
```
<category value="http://vocab.nerc.ac.uk/collection/C19/current/SVX00025/" label="World" count="110">
  <category value="http://vocab.nerc.ac.uk/collection/C19/current/SVX00005/" label="Atlantic Ocean" count="13">
    <category value="http://vocab.nerc.ac.uk/collection/C19/current/1/" label="North Atlantic Ocean" count="13">
      <category value="http://vocab.nerc.ac.uk/collection/C19/current/SVX00015/" label="Northeast Atlantic Ocean (40W)" count="13">
        <category value="http://vocab.nerc.ac.uk/collection/C19/current/1_7/" label="English Channel" count="12"/>
        <category value="http://vocab.nerc.ac.uk/collection/C19/current/1_8/" label="Bay of Biscay" count="3"/>
....
```
* old facet format is still supported but it sounds relevant to deprecate it and progressively move to the dimension format. Search and Editor board app are migrated to the dimension format.
* add example to know how to configure hierarchical facet using the regions thesaurus provided by GeoNetwork or the GEMET thesaurus.
@jonescc jonescc deleted the add-hierarchical-facets-to-core branch December 5, 2016 02:40
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants