As I try to write something to justify the srw/zeeRex relationship, it
occurs to me that the only concrete reason offered why the two efforts
shouldn't be aligned is the index vs. attribute approach. If there are
other tecnical incompatibilities that I've missed, or things that SRW need
that ZeeRex doesn't supply, please list them so we can try to address those
Looking over the recent discussion on indexes vs. attributes -- that
discussion got sidetracked to a discussion of soap, but it seems that where
we left off was that zeeRex would indeed include the abstract index names
that srw needs. If zeeRex also lists explicit attributes, so what? SRW can
ignore them, or better, zeeRex could define an element set for srw (srw is
going to ignore other things too, like record syntax, for instance).
So please tell me, what am I missing?
Mike Taylor wrote:
> Having through a little more about the relationship between ZeeRex and
> SRW, here's what I think:
> * Ralph wants SRW to define its own Explain-alike, independent of
> ZeeRex, thinking that what we've done here is too different from
> what SRW needs.
> * You want a strong SRW-ZeeRex connection, reasoning that it would be
> politically helpful for both parties to share technology.
> * No-one else seems to have a strong opinion either way.
> So I think that what is needed now is for you to make a position
> statement on why SRW needs ZeeRex and vice versa; otherwise we will
> probably all shrug and go with the Ralph Position out of sheer
> inertia. You're the man to open the debate.
> _/|_ _______________________________________________________________
> /o ) \/ Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]> www.miketaylor.org.uk
> )_v__/\ "I have heard the Big Music and I'll never be the same" --
> The Waterboys, "The Big Music"
> Ex-plain mailing list
> [log in to unmask]