> Iíve been giving more thought to SRU responses and have come to the
> conclusion that the Atom Feed document should not be a mandatory
> response format and should certainly not be the sole mandatory
> response format.
> The problem is that Atom Feeds were not intended for dynamically
> generated search results and have mandatory elements that are
> important for syndicated blog feeds but are meaningless for us.
> Specifically, they are the author, id and updated elements required on
> every response. I can live with the mandatory title element, but the
> others donít work.
I had responded to above issues in an earlier email on this list. See
What do you see as issues in the solution I proposed?
> Iím still interested in figuring out how to use Atom Feeds as a
> possible alternative response. It is clear that there are applications
> that want to use them. I just hope that their assumption that theyíve
> just gotten a list of blog entries from me matches up with the userís
> expectation that they just got a list of documents.
Farrukh Najmi wrote:
> Dr R. Sanderson wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress wrote:
>>> Let's see if this comes out better. A sample response record in ATOM:
>> As Ross points out, ATOM has some requirements for validation. In
>> particular there's quite a few mandatory elements both at the feed
>> level and the entry level which aren't quite so easy to map into the
>> SRU response while retaining the ATOM semantics, or without adding
>> extra requirements to implementers. For example the updated time for
>> the record.
> There are only a handful of mandatory properties AFAIK.
> Implementations typically should know when a record is updated. The
> search-ws spec can specify that implementations that do not have this
> ability use a fixed time that can never be used in reality (e.g.
> 1900-00-00T00:00:00Z ).
> Other mandatory values like those below can be required to have a
> value of "Unknown" if implementations do not support this.