Theo van Veen wrote:
> Will there will be no distinction between brief and full records?
Sorry, I realize you asked this earlier and I didn't mean to ignore
it; I've thought about it.
I don't think we want to distinguish, literally, between 'full' and
'brief', as that's gotten us into alot of trouble in Z39.50, and
anyway those are "element set names"; we've decided in Z39.50, for
xml, that element sets are really schemas. Certainly srw will
support defined sub-schemas for any of these four, but I don't think
we want to start assigning well-known names to sub-schemas, nor
distinguish any particular sub-schema as "brief", nor do we want to
be defining these schemas ourselves.
So we'll need to use whatever subschemas are defined. For MODS, for
example, there will be sub-schemas, but none are defined yet. For
example, there may be a MODS subset defined for the Minerva project,
and a corresponding schema. If there are sub-schema for dc and/or
onix that anyone wants listed (in table 2) I'll be happy to list
them.
--Ray
|