KMLM List

[Marco van Schagen <marco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,I just remembered my original reason to omit totals: Sushi does not allow
me to add a "total for all journals" row. This inspired me to think the
totals actually are not really part of the data.

Marco

On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 7:17 PM, Marco van Schagen <marco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> wrote:

> I agree, this has caused me headaches too. Now everybody needs their own
> "this makes sense" solution. And then the harvesters need to implement their
> solution to all variations we created :)
>
> marco
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 7:13 PM, Kim, Tae <Tae.Kim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>
>>  Yes, I agree, it’s redundant and non-normalized data. I was just looking
>> for something in the standard I can point to to prove my point to tell them
>> it’s not SUSHI-compliant.
>>
>> If not in the standard, I think it should be added.
>>
>> -Tae Kim
>>
>>
>>
>> On 4/17/09 10:03 AM, "Marco van Schagen" <marco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>> This would work, however, imagine the harvester loading it all into his
>> database and then sum a total for 2008. The sum would return double the
>> value.
>> We tried the same thing and this is how we did the YTD column. After
>> thinking it trough we decided to omit the summed values.
>>
>> I believe certain parts of the counter screenshots are meant for easy
>> human readibility. I believe this include the sum values. In machine to
>> machine communication, easy human readibility is not an issue, avoiding
>> invalidly interpreted data is.
>>
>> Marco
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 7:01 PM, Kim, Tae <Tae.Kim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>
>> I looks like that, I just abstracted out the XML.
>>
>> So actually, it looks like this with the sum at the end.
>>
>>
>>
>>                       <Period>
>>                           <ItemPerformance>
>>                              <Begin>2008-01-01</Begin>
>>                              <End>2008-01-31</End>
>>                              <Instance>
>>                                 <MetricType>ft_html</MetricType>
>>                                 <Count>3</Count>
>>                              </Instance>
>>                              <Instance>
>>                                 <MetricType>ft_pdf</MetricType>
>>                                 <Count>41</Count>
>>                              </Instance>
>>                              <Instance>
>>                                 <MetricType>ft_ps</MetricType>
>>                                 <Count>0</Count>
>>                              </Instance>
>>                           </ItemPerformance>
>>                           <ItemPerformance>
>>                              <Begin>2008-02-01</Begin>
>>                              <End>2008-02-29</End>
>>                              <Instance>
>>                                 <MetricType>ft_html</MetricType>
>>                                 <Count>4</Count>
>>                              </Instance>
>>                              <Instance>
>>                                 <MetricType>ft_pdf</MetricType>
>>                                  <Count>68</Count>
>>                              </Instance>
>>                              <Instance>
>>                                 <MetricType>ft_ps</MetricType>
>>                                 <Count>0</Count>
>>                              </Instance>
>>                           </ItemPerformance>
>>                           <ItemPerformance>
>>                              <Begin>2008-03-01</Begin>
>>                              <End>2008-03-31</End>
>>                              <Instance>
>>                                 <MetricType>ft_html</MetricType>
>>                                 <Count>0</Count>
>>                              </Instance>
>>                              <Instance>
>>                                 <MetricType>ft_pdf</MetricType>
>>                                 <Count>52</Count>
>>                              </Instance>
>>                              <Instance>
>>                                 <MetricType>ft_ps</MetricType>
>>                                 <Count>0</Count>
>>                              </Instance>
>>                           </ItemPerformance>
>>                           <ItemPerformance>
>> *                             <Begin>2008-01-01</Begin>
>>                              <End>2008-03-31</End>
>>                              <Instance>
>>                                 <MetricType>ft_html</MetricType>
>>                                 <Count>7</Count>
>>                              </Instance>
>>                              <Instance>
>>                                 <MetricType>ft_pdf</MetricType>
>>                                 <Count>161</Count>
>>
>>                              </Instance>
>>                              <Instance>
>>                                 <MetricType>ft_ps</MetricType>
>>                                 <Count>0</Count>
>>                              </Instance>
>>                           </ItemPerformance>
>> *
>>
>>                       </Period>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 4/17/09 9:53 AM, "John Milligan" <john.milligan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <
>> http://john.milligan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote:
>>
>> If I am clear on what you’re asking, that doesn’t appear to be the
>> standard. If successful <MetricTypes /> are to be returned, the format
>> should be similar to the following snippet below:
>>
>>                        <Period>
>>                           <ItemPerformance>
>>                              <Begin>2008-01-01</Begin>
>>                              <End>2008-01-31</End>
>>                              <Instance>
>>                                 <MetricType>ft_html</MetricType>
>>                                 <Count>3</Count>
>>                              </Instance>
>>                              <Instance>
>>                                 <MetricType>ft_pdf</MetricType>
>>                                 <Count>41</Count>
>>                              </Instance>
>>                              <Instance>
>>                                 <MetricType>ft_ps</MetricType>
>>                                 <Count>0</Count>
>>                              </Instance>
>>                           </ItemPerformance>
>>                           <ItemPerformance>
>>                              <Begin>2008-02-01</Begin>
>>                              <End>2008-02-29</End>
>>                              <Instance>
>>                                 <MetricType>ft_html</MetricType>
>>                                 <Count>4</Count>
>>                              </Instance>
>>                              <Instance>
>>                                 <MetricType>ft_pdf</MetricType>
>>                                  <Count>68</Count>
>>                              </Instance>
>>                              <Instance>
>>                                 <MetricType>ft_ps</MetricType>
>>                                 <Count>0</Count>
>>                              </Instance>
>>                           </ItemPerformance>
>>                           <ItemPerformance>
>>                              <Begin>2008-03-01</Begin>
>>                              <End>2008-03-31</End>
>>                              <Instance>
>>                                 <MetricType>ft_html</MetricType>
>>                                 <Count>0</Count>
>>                              </Instance>
>>                              <Instance>
>>                                 <MetricType>ft_pdf</MetricType>
>>                                 <Count>52</Count>
>>                              </Instance>
>>                              <Instance>
>>                                 <MetricType>ft_ps</MetricType>
>>                                 <Count>0</Count>
>>                              </Instance>
>>                           </ItemPerformance>
>>                        </Period>
>>
>> I hope this helps.
>>
>> * *John Milligan,
>> Principal/Lead SUSHI Developer
>>  Scholarly iQ, LLC - IT & eBusiness Solutions
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Kim, Tae 
>> [mailto:Tae.Kim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<Tae.Kim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]
>>
>> *Sent:* Friday, April 17, 2009 12:30 PM
>> *To:* sushidevelopers@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <http://sushidevelopers@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>>  *Subject:* [sushidevelopers] Counter XML Question
>>
>> I’m working with Proquest sushi service and they return the stats for
>> every month and a total for all the months.
>>
>> For example if I ask for Jan-March, it returns something like:
>> 2008-01-01 to 2008-01-31: 3 requests
>> 2008-02-01 to 2008-02-28: 4 requests
>> 2008-03-01 to 2008-03-31: 1 requests
>> 2008-01-01 to 2008-03-31: 8 requests
>>
>> I’d LIKE to tell them that really, the last is redundant and spans
>> multiple months so it shouldn’t be in the result.
>> But really, I can’t find anything in the SUSHI or COUNTER standard that
>> dictates that each data point should be exactly one month in duration.
>>
>> The xsd of course can’t really validate  anything like this.
>>
>> Can anybody point me to something in the standard? Usage stats spanning
>> multiple months is kinda problematic for me and I imagine for other clients
>> as well.
>>
>> Tae Kim
>> Software Developer
>> Serials Solutions
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
>> Version: 8.5.287 / Virus Database: 270.11.58/2061 - Release Date: 04/17/09
>> 07:08:00
>>
>>
>>
>>
>