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 2002

ZNG May 2002

Subject:

Re: srw instances -- response schema vs. wsdl

From:

Poul Henrik Jørgensen <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Z39.50 Next-Generation Initiative

Date:

Thu, 16 May 2002 12:36:56 +0200

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (69 lines)

Hi Ray and others,
 
Here are my answers to your questions about the SRW "Response Schema". 
(I believe, that my interpretation is basically the same as Alan's').

1) SRW currently supports only one request/response function, i.e. the SRW
"searchRetrieve" operation.

2) The input- and output- parameters of the "searchRetrieve" operation are
defined by only two messages appropriately called "searchRetrieverRequest"
and "searchRetrieveResponse".

3) The current "ZiNG" WSDL prototype definition includes a string-parameter
called "responseSchema" as part of the "searchRetrieveRequest" message.
Ref.: http://www.loc.gov/z3950/agency/zing/wsdl.xml 
This parameter was intended to let a SRW client instruct an SRW Server to
respond with an alternative message-format referenced by the
"responseSchema" string (URI).

4) In WSDL it is difficult to specify the use of arbitrary undefined message
(parameter) structures as part of a given Web Service operation (function). 
It is therefore proposed to drop the "responseSchema" parameter from the
"searchRetrieveRequest" message in the "searchRetrieve" operation.

5) The draft SRW WSDL specification, that was presented during the April
2002 ZIG Meeting at OCLC, has been updated.
The revised version is closely aligned with the ZiNG prototype specification
without the "responseSchema" parameter.
The revised SRW WSDL is available here:
http://www.portia.dk/pubs/SRW/SrwService.wsdl 

(The revised SRW WDSL has been validated by a couple of standard WSDL tools
including XMLSpy, XMethods and SOAPClient - but not by MS .NET)

Best regards,
Poul Henrik Jørgensen

-----Original Message-----
From: Ray Denenberg [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 15. maj 2002 17:27
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: srw instances -- response schema vs. wsdl


Alan Kent wrote:

> My understanding is that the WSDL file defines the single structure for
> returning records within (for SRW). There was still 1 switch left which
> was to specify the preferred form of XML (eg: Dublin Core vs MODS) for
> the record to be returned in ("record schema"). But there was no need
> for different "response schema"s in SRW.

It's clear that we all agree we don't want multiple response schemas hence
there's
no need for a response schema parameter. I'm still not completely clear why
we need
*any* response schema, and I do understand your point that having multiple
potential record schemas causes a problem for representing this in wsdl.

Is it the case that you simply can't do it, or is it the case that you can,
but
only by using an encoding form that we didn't want to use?  I suppose I
could
figure out the answer if I spend a few days reviewing the voluminous
discussion we
had on this, but could someone summarize  please?

--Ray

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