Are there other category IDs for Microsoft Translator besides tech, speech and generalnn? Where can I find them?
Valid category values are <blank> or "general", "tech", "speech", "generalnn" or a custom category identifier you copied from the Hub overview page.
The result is not necessarily different for every language pair.
Related
I've got a list of author names but I don't have Id's for any of them.
I'd like to:
Query by author name and store the most probable AuId.
List all papers written by a given AuId.
Is there any way to do this with the current interpret/evaluate APIs? It seems like everything is tied to a paper entity and I want to be sure I am only ever selecting and using one AuId.
Thanks.
I am not aware of such a feature. But indirectly, you could first search for the author name (AA.AuN in the expr-field), obtain all the (unique) various author IDs (AA.AuId in the attributes field), and search for their publications.
(You could even add orderby=logprob:desc, but to be honest, I am not 100% sure what logprob does.)
So, the first step could be to search for the author name (e.g. John Smith) like this and fetch all those AA.AuId where the names (AA.AuN) seem to fit John Smith (let's just add the orderby=logprob:desc):
https://api.labs.cognitive.microsoft.com/academic/v1.0/evaluate?&expr=Composite(AA.AuN=%27john%20smith%27)&count=100&attributes=AA.AuN,AA.AuId&orderby=logprob:desc&subscription-key={YOUR-KEY}
As a second step, if you have an Author ID AA.AuId (here, for example, 3038752200), use this to list their papers (ordered by year, in a descending manner orderby=Y:desc):
https://api.labs.cognitive.microsoft.com/academic/v1.0/evaluate?&expr=Composite(AA.AuId=3038752200)&count=100&attributes=AA.AuN,AA.AuId,DOI,Ti,VFN,Y&orderby=Y:desc&subscription-key={YOUR-KEY}
The approach would be more promising if you had an institutional affiliation as well. Then you could change the expr field to Composite(And(AA.AuN='{AUTHOR-NAME}',AA.AfId={AFFILIATION-ID})) so as to search for all {AUTHOR-NAMES} affiliated to {AFFILIATION-ID}.
I'm doing the restaurant tutorial for IBM Watson Assistant and I need to extract the number of persons for the reservation.
Since I'm French, I wanted to try this tutorial in French. However, French language being what it is, when you make a reservation for a table in English, there isn't any number in this phrase. But in french, the same phrase gives you "Je voudrai réserver une table".
"Une table" can be translated in different ways such as "a table" or... "one table" and this one table is interpreted by Watson Assistant as being the number of persons (even if I said that I would like to reserve a table for 5 people).
I was thinking to tell Waston to take only the second number but since you don't have to add the number of persons in the same phrase and eventually that you could put the number of persons before the "a table", this isn't a good solution.
Is there another solution that would be way better and more importantly would work in a majority of case ?
First of all, yes, I know that IIF (Intuit Interchange Format) files are a deprecated way of transferring data into Quickbooks Desktop.
However, I have been tasked with writing a PHP script that will create an IIF file that a customer could use to import an invoice that is created by my web application. If it were my choice, I wouldn't attempt to use IIF.
The Question:
Using an IIF import, is it possible to have Quickbooks use either its internal ids, an account number (which ends up in the NOTE field), or a custom field to link the customer to the invoice rather than using the NAME field?
It appears the answer is no.
The closest thing I could find to an answer was from here:
https://community.intuit.com/questions/1575622-how-do-you-import-iif-file-using-a-custom-field-as-identifier
The answer from that link:
"Custom Fields are not a Key Field; Vendor Name is the Key Field. You
cannot import Bills except by reference to the Relational key field of
Vendor Name. This is a relational database, so the things that matter
are the Key Fields. AP and Vendor Name, at a minimum, define Bills."
My question was about transactions rather than Bills, but I imagine that the same answer that applies to Bills applies to Invoices and the customer Name.
I'm building an app that will allow users to manage groups. Each group contains a name, campus, and data type. They are not in any particular hierarchy - semantically, a campus could be considered to have many groups, but it would be also natural to consider a group at the top of the hierarchy, spread out over many campuses.
A combination of name/campus/data_type is unique
NAME CAMPUS DATA_TYPE
---------------------------------------
LABS WEST IPv4
LABS WEST IPv6
LABS EAST IPv4
USERS NORTH userids
USERS WEST userids
USERS EAST userids
So for example, the LABS group for the WEST campus with DATA_TYPE of IPv4 will contain all the IP subnets related to west-campus labs.
Now, the only requirement for drilling down to this data is by group. It is not a requirement to gather a list of all WEST campus groups, for example, or all groups that have a "IPv6" data type. However it is necessary to get a list of all campuses that have a "LABS" group, and it is also necessary to get all the data_types for LABS.
So how should I create my endpoints?
Option 1
Long, but fairly clear URLs.
GET /groups/LABS/ (returns LABS groups across all campuses and data_types)
GET /groups/LABS/data_type/IPv4 (returns all IPv4 LABS groups across all campuses)
GET /groups/LABS/campus/WEST (returns all WEST LABS groups across all data_types)
POST /groups/LABS/campus/NORTH/data_type/IPv4 (create a new group)
POST /groups/LABS/campus/NORTH/data_type/userids (another new group)
ADVANTAGE:
avoids any query parameters
DISADVANTAGES:
it represents a certain hierarchy that is not actually necessary.
It also requires the app to support both group->campus->data_type and
group->data_type->campus hierarchies.
Option 2
Treat the group as the only part of the hierarchy, and treat "campus" and "data_type" as non-hierarchical identifiers:
GET /groups/LABS
GET /groups/LABS?campus=WEST
GET /groups/LABS?data_type=IPv4
GET /groups/LABS?campus=WEST&data_type=IPv4
POST /groups/LABS (POST data: {campus: "WEST", data_type: "IPv4})
POST /groups/LABS (POST data: {campus: "WEST", data_type: "IPv4})
ADVANTAGE:
it seems to reflect the non-hierarchy of "data_types" and "campus",
and makes it easy to specify (say) campus without a data_type (or
vice versa).
DISADVANTAGES:
I'm not totally sure this is an appropriate use of query parameters.
Furthermore it does not provide a very pretty "permalink" to any
unique combination of group/campus/data_type.
I'm leaning towards option 2. Is that the best way to represent this data? Or am I thinking about it wrong?
I would suggest instead supporting two endpoints. It's clear from your description that a group is not uniquely defined by a name, but your URI structure implies that it is. Instead, use a synthetic id to uniquely identify a group.
GET /groups
?name={}
?campus={}
?data_type={}
<- some collection of all groups that match whichever criteria are specified
POST /groups
-> { "name": "LABS", "campus": "WEST", "data_type": "IPv4" }
GET /groups/{id}
<- { "name": "LABS", "campus": "WEST", "data_type": "IPv4" }
This approach gives you more flexibility for in the future when they decide to add a new property, or want to search by data_type across all groups.
You can either include unique ids in responses from the server (meh) or include hypermedia links to give you interesting relationships, such as all other groups with the same name, or on the same campus.
Since Term Store functionality (and probably most of metadata functionality) isn't available in SharePoint Foundation 2013, I couldn't find a way to search through the pictures using some sort of tagging. Thus I decided to employ something what is available already in Foundation version.
When you edit the picture, you can see 3 fields: Title, Description and Keywords like so:
It would be nice if I could make Search index terms (tags) added to the Keywords field. However, after some testing I saw that only Title is indexed and presented in search results. Although I could use my search terms in Title field, it won't be elegant.
So, is there any way to make use of Keywords entity in my case? Please note, it's a Foundation version, so there is no Enterprise Keywords functionality either (or at least I couldn't find one).
OK, so I used this kind of workaround in the end:
Went to my Picture Libraly's Settings
Chose to create a new column (this can also be done in Site Settings > Site Columns, if you want to reuse it for more sites)
Called the column Primary Tags
Chose Single line of text option, because multiple lines option cannot be indexed
Because single line option is limited to 255 characters, I repeated steps 2-4 to create another column and named it Secondary Tags
Then went to Indexed Columns page and added those 2 new columns to the index
Now I have Title, Primary Tags and Secondary Tags indexed fields available for each picture with a total of 765 characters available.