Hi Ray,
It is a good idea to put a link to the draft ZNG Namespace schema into the
report with an appropriate disclaimer as you suggest.
The schema is only intended to clarify intentions in the draft report, since
I have no major disagreements with the existing proposal, but there are a
number of details that we need to address.
I have taken the following "liberties" in the namespace schema:
1) Added a ZNG namespace reference in order to facilitate future
developments and versioning.
2) Made most parameters optional, including the DatabaseName, which may in
some cases be implicit for a given host.
3) Added an optional RequestId parameter, that is returned along with the
corresponding response. This may facilitate thin clients and gateways -
especially if we use asyncronous transports.
4) Added the ResponseSchemaId and RecordSchemaId to the SearchResponse. This
may also facilitate future developments and make life easier for thin
clients.
Best regards,
Poul Henrik
-----Original Message-----
From: Ray Denenberg [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2001 5:26 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: ÆFwd: RE: ZNG Draft Report for Final ReviewÅ
Poul Henrik -- Thanks. (I've subscribed your other address now.)
Time's running short for me. I won't have time to review the schema this
week.
Should I include a link to it in the report? If so should there be some
disclaimer, like, "it's only a draft, and it may not correspond exactly to
the
report, but we'll work out the discrepancies soon"?
I glanced at it and I can't tell if there is anything in the report that you
dissagree with. If so please tell me explicitly, and soon.
With regard to the result set issue, I'll leave it in, with some statement
that
if the server supplies it then that is some level of guarantee that results
will
be static. We can argue this further, later.
--Ray
-------- Original Message --------
From: Poul Henrik Jørgensen <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: RE: ZNG Draft Report for Final Review
To: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>, "LeVan,Ralph" <[log in to unmask]>,Janifer
Gatenby <[log in to unmask]>,Matthew
Dovey<[log in to unmask]>,"'William
E. Moen'" <[log in to unmask]>,"Stevens, Pat" <[log in to unmask]>,"'Poul Henrik
Jorgensen'" <[log in to unmask]>,"'Janifer Gatenby'"
<[log in to unmask]>,"'Bill
Moen'"<[log in to unmask]>,"'Sally McCallum'" <[log in to unmask]>, "'Cliff
Lynch'" <[log in to unmask]>,"Womble,Kelly" <[log in to unmask]>, "'Larry
Dixson'"
<[log in to unmask]>,"'Ralph Orlik'" <[log in to unmask]>, Mark Needleman
<[log in to unmask]>
Dear All,
Instead of posting a long prose document to clarify a number of issues
related to the draft ZNG report, I have prepared a draft namespace with an
XML XSD Schema which define proposed optional and required parameters:
http://www.portia.dk/pubs/ZNG/ZngV1_xsd/ZngV1.htm
(beware of the hidden underscore between "ZngV1" and "xsd")
Please review and let me know, if there is something that you find unclear,
meaningless - or disagreeable.
Kind regards,
Poul Henrik
PS. The new ZNG listserver refuses my postings from this e-mail address,
which is the one, that I normally use.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ray Denenberg [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2001 5:28 PM
To: LeVan,Ralph; Janifer Gatenby; Matthew Dovey; 'William E. Moen';
Stevens, Pat; 'Poul Henrik Jorgensen'; 'Janifer Gatenby'; 'Bill Moen';
'Sally McCallum'; 'Cliff Lynch'; Womble,Kelly; 'Larry Dixson'; 'Ralph
Orlik'; Mark Needleman
Cc: [log in to unmask]
Subject: ZNG Draft Report for Final Review
I've revised the draft report, based on a few comments I've gotten. Attached
is
a draft for final review. I would like to publish this report by Thursday
afternoon (I will be away all of next week, and possibly Friday).
If I don't hear further from anyone I'll assume the report is ok. However I
need to know whether or not to list meeting participants, or organizations
only
(or neither). And what about the timeline?
--Ray
--
Ray Denenberg
Library of Congress
[log in to unmask]
202-707-5795
|