"LeVan,Ralph" wrote:

> We have specified that the Truncation attribute always has a value of 104
> (z39.58 truncation).

Well, I missed that!  Does everyone go along with this? (Or did others miss it
too?)  How does that square with the current debate over the Z39.58 truncation
attribute? I suppose we better solve it.

Please note (and I posted a message yesterday), I've updated the cql document
http://www.loc.gov/z3950/agency/zing/cql.html
and the mapping section (that mentions truncation) is currently empty. I didn't
know how valid it was so I thought it better to leave it out until we review
it.

The previous version is at
http://www.loc.gov/z3950/agency/zing/cql-old.html
Please all review this mapping section so we can bring it up to date.

--Ray