> > I would also like to see sort as an option
> > within CQL, not a separate
> > service.
> Jan -- would you like to suggest what the sort
> parameter would consist of? (First, I suppose we
> need to see what our result set model will look
> like.) As Ralph and others have noted, even
> though a sort option would provide significant
> potential for optimization we've long tried to do
> it for Z39.50 and haven't been able to agree.
Why not all of the other options in CQL as well? Then you could just do
a Google style one-query-fits-all.
Surely if there's any advantage to SOAP at all, then it's that it lets you
easily parse requests by using existing XML libraries.
Please can we not just dump everything in CQL, thereby losing the only
advantage that SRW has over Z39.50 ?
,'/:. Rob Sanderson ([log in to unmask])
,'--/::(@)::. Special Collections and Archives, extension 3142
,'---/::::::::::. Twin Cathedrals: telnet: liverpool.o-r-g.org 7777
____/:::::::::::::. WWW: http://liverpool.o-r-g.org:8000/
I L L U M I N A T I