This is unlikely to ever happen. We have instead provided the data to do this yourself at some reasonable sensitivity.
-John On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 10:27 AM, hydrodog <dov.kru...@gmail.com> wrote: > John, > > The reason for viewing an aggregate count rather than individual > methods is to have a much more sensitive way of detecting a new > topic. Sampling will only give us a good representative sample above > the threshhold, once it's already quite popular. We'd like to be able > to follow a topic from the start, even if it never makes it big, based > on other criteria. > > Rather than a trends feed, I suggest a statistics feed would be more > general. Consider something like: > > http://search.twitter.com/stats/daily.json?target="foo bar xj17" > > which would give back the daily statistics on the frequency of each > token. Then, we could follow up on individual ones of interest with a > bigram request. With an api based on post, we could possibly send a > large number of such requests in one batch. > > http://search.twitter.com/stats/bigram.json?target="foo bar xj17" > > (search for all messages containing any two of the listed targets) > > I don't know how you organize your data, but obviously, since you > allow search by token, you have the infrastructure to make this easy > to do. >