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

clarification on additional motivations for Search API #2053

Closed
mixterj opened this issue Oct 12, 2021 · 7 comments
Closed

clarification on additional motivations for Search API #2053

mixterj opened this issue Oct 12, 2021 · 7 comments
Assignees
Labels
Milestone

Comments

@mixterj
Copy link
Contributor

mixterj commented Oct 12, 2021

The Search API defines a set of possible Motivations (https://preview.iiif.io/api/search-v3-alignment/api/search/2.0/#query-parameters) as well as defines a pattern to using additional motivations from the Web Annotation Ontology. The definition of using other motivations is not clear and should be reviewed for current Search 2.0 Alignment work

@azaroth42
Copy link
Member

Previous discussion about changing either params (include / exclude) or the value to allow +/- in the value.

Should just reference the registry of motivations.

@glenrobson
Copy link
Member

Existing motivation registry (which is empty):

https://iiif.io/api/registry/motivations/

@tomcrane
Copy link
Contributor

Discussed on Search TSG call 2021-10-19

@digitaldogsbody
Copy link
Member

Add new contextualizing motivation to the registry

@kirschbombe
Copy link
Contributor

kirschbombe commented May 2, 2022

I have a PR for updating the motivations registry here: #2129.
Should I do the PR against the v3 alignment branch instead?

@kirschbombe kirschbombe self-assigned this May 26, 2022
@kirschbombe
Copy link
Contributor

kirschbombe commented May 26, 2022

The motivations registry will be merged shortly. I'll update the v3 branch to just reference the updated registry and to add links for the highlighting and contextualizing motivations to the registry.

@kirschbombe
Copy link
Contributor

I created a new ticket for @azaroth42's comment about changing either params (include / exclude) or the value to allow +/- in the value: #2134

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants