Options Regarding Attachments

[WaxCylinderRevival]

I often added attributes to dateline/date in frus:attachment. We might want to discuss how to handle attachments, some of which—but not all—include search-friendly dates and placeNames. Options include:

• Exclude from search
• Include, with results appearing subordinate to parent document
• Include, with results appearing as distinct items

[joewiz]

This is a great proposal for next generation FRUS search in general!

At the moment (on the original search function and in the current frus-dates prototype), we're implicitly using a combination of the 1st and 2nd options (date searches aren't directly hitting attachments, but full text searches are). Treating attachments as distinct from their parent documents could be quite useful.

Some context:

• We currently have 14,568 attachments.
• We've never done anything (either in print or online) with attachments besides display them beneath the document they're attached to or include their text in the full text search target of their parent document.
• In our ODD, they can take any structures allowed in document divs, but aren't required to have any in particular. They're just a container for document-like content.
• Our <frus:attachment> elements don't even have @xml:id values—which would be needed to address them, particularly in your 2nd and 3rd options.