We're back to my claim that clients don't clean up after themselves.  The
vast majority will always turn on the bit that says "Keep my search!".  So,
let's not complicate the documentation with waht seems like a silly
parameter.

Ralph

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ray Denenberg [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Monday, June 17, 2002 11:50 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: result set model for srw
>
>
> Mike Taylor wrote:
>
> > > > So my concrete proposal is simply that the client
> should send, as
> > > > a part of the search request, a bit saying whether or
> not it wants
> > > > the server to maintain a persistent result set.
> > >
> > > We explored all of this, in great depth, at our first
> meeting a year
> > > ago.  There was strong sentiment not to do this as it would be a
> > > futile effort to define negotiation that wouldn't work in practice
> > > anyway.
> >
> > Why not?
>
> This is my recollection of the thinking when we discussed it
> a year ago:
> servers in general aren't  going to be flexible enough to alter their
> behavior based on the user request, nor even to reject the request in
> advance.
>
> In other words, optimally, if you had such a flag, you'd want
> the server to
> make the result set persistent if you asked it to; but
> lacking that, at
> minimum, you'd want the sever to tell you if it cannot honor
> the request.
> The thinking was that as a practical matter servers can't even do the
> minumum, so a flag would not only be useless, it would be misleading.
>
> I'm simply trying to recollect the thinking a year ago. The
> subject could be
> revisited.
>
> --Ray
>