Why not a surrogate diagnostic in the middle of the records? I like them.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ray Denenberg [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2002 5:21 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: result set position
> "LeVan,Ralph" wrote:
> > Sorry, but I still don't understand. If you sent back a surrogate
> > diagnostic, then there would be no gap in the numbers and
> you wouldn't send
> > back record #11.
> The idea is to not send the surrogate as a record (like we do
> in Z39.50), but
> separately, along with the other, possibly non-surrogate, diagnostics.
> But your point I suppose is that even then the client can
> infer the real record
> positions by looking at the diagnostics, assuming that they
> refer to a result
> set position. Though it would make it harder.
> Anyway I'll take it out.