[Nepomuk] Nepomuk facets

[Sebastian Trüg]

On 06/21/2010 12:23 PM, Alessandro Sivieri wrote:
> 2010/6/21 Sebastian Trüg <trueg at kde.org <mailto:trueg at kde.org>>
> 
>     The thing is that I would like the make the facet stuff public API for
>     KDE 4.6. That is why I am picking on it and being a pita. :P
> 
> 
> :D
> Then I can search a different term for "Term", but "Facet" must retain
> its name, which is its academia name :)

Do we really need an extra public class for Term? Isn't that something
that can be handled internally?

>     Do you actually want to create different representations for different
>     types of facets. The only exception I can see is the rating. But that
>     could easily be filtered out and added as a separate gui element.
> 
> 
> Well, currently my answer should be "yes" (looking at Sembrowser), but
> actually is "no": in the Web world, faceted browsing does not use
> different representations for facets, it uses a uniform one, so in the
> end I am for uniform representation also here :)

And are you really using different representations? The way I see it you
have only different representations for exclusive and non-exclusive
groups. The latter being tags.

> The only thing I am objecting here is that a model should support only
> one facet (or one facetgroup, following your name), because I really
> don't know if it makes sense to show more than one facet in the same UI.
> Even if you use the same representation (say, a listview), then each
> listview should have its model instance, and each model instance should
> have one facet, and each facet n terms.

Then a model does not makes any sense at all anymore. :)
The way I see it the list of facets (and here I am using your wording -
the correct one) needs to be handled by one manager class anyway. And if
that class is flexible enough (via addFacet methods or subclassing) then
there is no need for anything else.
After all you will always need all facets and not just one of them.

Cheers,
Sebastian