> Guess we better all look at the conformance page before we go live.
> Right now, cql is mandatory.
Right, but support for, say, sort or proximity isn't listed as optional
either, but there's still a diagnostic to say that you can't do it. :)
Re 'v1.0' vs '1.0' vs '' -- of no opinion, what you've done is fine.
On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, Ray Denenberg wrote:
> I neglected to list (on the "to do" list) the SRU
> syntax. Recall the discussion yesterday. We
We also changed unknown to:
<unknown>
<param>someParam</param>
<value>Text</value>
</unknown>
for the example. This thus needs to be put in the response schema
somewhere too!
Also the 'dc' in the <sortKeys> in the example should be the DC Record
schema identifier now. As also in the example URL Syntax.
Apart from that I think it's okay. [But would say that as I wrote it :)]
As Jannifer has been/is being/will be on planes, is someone else willing
to work out a bib1 <--> SRW diagnostics mapping? Or, as I suspect, will we
wait for poor Jannifer to come back to do this?
Rob
--
,'/:. Rob Sanderson ([log in to unmask])
,'-/::::. http://www.o-r-g.org/~azaroth/
,'--/::(@)::. 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
|