I think the SRU response still needs the SOAP wrapper. Its presence doesn't
hurt the client and it provides a fault handling mechanism. In addition, if
I just stripped off the SOAP envelope, I'd still have SOAP references
inside. Just looking at my latest transaction, I see "<recordSchema
xsi:nil="true" />" where the xsi is normally declared in the soapenv
element.
Besides, its just easier to take the SRW response and pass it back as an SRU
response. :-)
Ralph
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Sanderson [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 11:48 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: SRU
>
>
> The return value of an SRU call is just the XML that would normally be
> contained within the <SOAP:Body> element?
>
> eg:
> <searchRetrieveResponse>
> ...
> And can contain all the xsi:type="xsd:foo" bits and pieces?
> If so, I've wrapped my SRW code to produce SRU as well :)
> eg:
> http://srw.o-r-g.org:8080/marc/?query=computer
>
> Rob
>
> [And have eventually found all the flags needed to ensure
> there really are
> no multi-refs, blech]
>
> --
> ,'/:. 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
>
|