LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ZNG Archives


ZNG Archives

ZNG Archives


[email protected]


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ZNG Home

ZNG Home

ZNG  May 2003

ZNG May 2003

Subject:

Re: SRW/SRU and Metasearch products

From:

Sebastian Hammer <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Z39.50 Next-Generation Initiative

Date:

Wed, 28 May 2003 13:23:48 +0200

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (96 lines)

Ralph,

Uh.. I don't think I was trying to propose that *we* roll Yet Another
Z39.50-spinoff (:-), although I suppose it's a good discussion to take.
What would its scope be? SR For Metasearching (SRM)? It seems like if we
make *TOO* many protocols, we as a group will either be branded as people
who like to/are good at making new protocols, or as silly and largely
irrelevant.

But I agree that the crucial thing right now is a dialogue with "them" to
help determine just what they need.

--Sebastian


At 08:49 27-05-2003 -0400, LeVan,Ralph wrote:
>And, of course, you're right.  I guess I'm just resistant to putting so much
>of the complexity of Z39.50 back into SRW.  So let's not do that.  As you
>suggest, it's easy to roll a new protocol whenever we want.  Let's try to
>carry as much of SRW forward as we can and add what they need.  (I'm not
>sure we really understand what they need yet.)  I think CQL will survive
>into the new protocol, but maybe without resultSetNames.  (If the intent is
>to drive down costs, then that's a good candidate to go.)  Clearly searches
>across multiple databases, but not so clearly multiple searches for multiple
>databases.  One combined result set or one result set per database?  (My
>preference is the latter.)
>
>By the way, we decided long ago that holding connections open was more
>expensive than making and breaking them.  So, our clients negotiate a
>reconnect capability and we drop the connection after every response.  The
>client sends a sessionID with the request that comes over the next connect.
>
>Ralph
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Sebastian Hammer [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> > Sent: Sunday, May 25, 2003 7:16 PM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: SRW/SRU and Metasearch products
> >
> >
> > At 23:02 24-05-2003 -0400, LeVan,Ralph wrote:
> >
> > >These sound like serious folks with specific requirements
> > and a commitment
> > >to serious code.  Make them do real z39.50.
> >
> > I have total sympathy for this view, but my sense is that if
> > we can't do
> > better than that, we (ie. the ZiNG/ZIG community) might as
> > well just tell
> > the commercial content providers to go roll their own web
> > service. That's a
> > totally valid position, but it seems to me that it begs a more
> > philosophical discussion about exactly who we hope will take
> > up the SRW
> > protocol, if not those groups. We *were* looking for a
> > broader audience
> > with SRW, right?
> >
> > The funny thing about SOAP and its integration into modern development
> > environments is that it makes it easy as pie to develop customised
> > protocols for just about anything, and people seem to do so.
> > What I see as
> > the major departure of the "metasearchers" is that they have
> > no angst about
> > dealing with multiple protocols -- they have business models
> > and suport
> > frameworks in place for handling it, and the users are paying
> > for the party
> > but they're also, arguably, getting more interoperability and
> > functionality
> > than we have been able to deliver with Z39.50.
> >
> > In that context, the business case for implementing SRW (much
> > less Z39.50)
> > is much weaker than it might have been 10 years ago, when
> > network protocols
> > were black magic and metasearchers might have been
> > technically feasible,
> > but they weren't practical business propositions. And it
> > makes sense to me
> > to at least seek a dialogue with these folks, and see if we
> > can meet them
> > halfway.
> >
> > --Sebastian
> > --
> > Sebastian Hammer, Index Data <http://www.indexdata.dk/>
> > Ph: +45 3341 0100, Fax: +45 3341 0101
> >

--
Sebastian Hammer, Index Data <http://www.indexdata.dk/>
Ph: +45 3341 0100, Fax: +45 3341 0101

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

July 2017
October 2016
July 2016
August 2014
February 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
February 2013
January 2013
October 2012
August 2012
April 2012
January 2012
October 2011
May 2011
April 2011
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager