Robert Sanderson wrote:
> > . There are three possibilities: (1) new set, discard
> > old; (2) new set, keep old; (3) no new set (re-write old set). Should
> > the protocol specify this behavior or leave it to the server?
>
> Does this need to be set out in the protocol?
>
> If the server returns the old resultset name then the set has been
> rewritten.
But do we want to allow result sets to be re-written? You could argue that
violates the result set model. Of course real Z39.50 allows it, but gets
around the model issue by saying that the old result set is deleted and a new
one by the same name is created. Maybe it's simpler just to say "create a new
result set". Leave unanswered the question of whether the old one stays
around.
|