Twitter API/查询来搜索用户个人资料？
有什么方法可以在 Twitter 上的用户个人资料中进行搜索吗？
例如，用户 A 提到他是“安全、黑客极客”，他的网站是 http://hackme.com
现在我想以两种方式进行搜索：
在用户个人资料中搜索“安全”或“黑客”，将返回包括 A 在内的所有在其个人资料中包含安全一词的用户
搜索 http:// hackme.com 以及所有以此为网站或个人资料的用户将被返回
注意：我不希望返回包含上述文字的推文，我想在用户个人资料中搜索！
Is there some way I can search in the profiles of users on Twitter?
e.g. User A has mentioned that he is "security, hacking geek" and his website is http://hackme.com
Now i want to search in 2 ways:
Search for "security" or "hacking" in user profiles and all users including A who have the word security in their profiles will be returned
search for http://hackme.com and all users with that as their website or in their profile will be returned
NOTE: I do not want the tweets with the above words to be returned, I want to search in user profiles!
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（1）
在这里回答一个老问题，但我发现它与我当前正在查看的内容相关。
据我所知，您需要按照前面的评论中的建议使用目录，或者进行自己的黑客攻击。 PeopleBrowsr 似乎实现了部分解决方案，因为它使您能够查询个人资料字段，但似乎并没有在该搜索中包含 URL。但它非常昂贵。
我个人使用的解决方法是结合使用 Google 站点搜索和 URL 作为术语。从长远来看，这当然不是万无一失的，但如果再加上一些巧妙的验证，您也许能够消除大量噪音并利用结果。
即 site:twitter.com link:microsoft.com 为您提供 @MSConnect
此规则有很多例外，有时使用或不使用 link: 命令会更好。但就目前而言，如果您不愿意付费，最好的解决方案是提出自己的解决方法，并接受结果会缺乏精确性。
Answering a bit of an old question here but I found it relevant to what I'm currently looking at.
As far as I can tell, you need to either use a directory, as suggested in the previous comment or roll your own hack. PeopleBrowsr seems to achieve part of the solution in that it enables you to query profile fields but it doesn't appear to include URL in that search. It's very expensive though.
I'm personally using the workaround of using a combination of Google site search, combined with the URL as a term. It's certainly not foolproof by a long shot but if couple with some clever validation, you may be able to strip out a lot of the noise and make use of the results.
i.e. site:twitter.com link:microsoft.com gives you @MSConnect
There are a lot of exceptions to this rule and sometimes it's better with or without the link: command. For the time being though, it seems that if you're not willing to pay, the best solution is to come up with your own workaround and accept that there will be a lack of precision in the results.