> > What is stopping me dumping all of my 1.2 megabyte ead record into
> > the <dc:description> element?
>
> Not that I like Theo's proposal, but -- Rob, this question is one
> you're going to have to answer whether Theo gets his way or not. What
The fact that you've said it's validatable by the schema at
http://www.loc.gov/zing/srw/dcschema/v1.0/ and that doesn't mention EAD
as being valid below <dc:description>
> that I fetched from your SRU server that you seem to be abusing the
> title field in a similar way :-)
Oh? What query did you do... there shouldn't be any elements below <title>
in it...
> > Au revoir, interoperability.
> Theo's perspective is that two bits of software, server and client,
> can be plugged together and produce some kind of result, then you have
> interoperability -- and so you do, of a kind. (Let's call it
> "syntactic interoperability"). But you're concerning yourself further
> with whether you can actually interpret the records you get back.
Of course. It's meaningless to say 'I have interoperability' if I can't
actually do anything with the record because I don't know what the <title>
tag in it means or what all these <ead> elements are.
> ``This is a Dublin Core record, but I've polluted it with some extra
> elements from the "rec" namespace. Use them if you understand them,
> ignore them otherwise."
Which we can do by defining a trivial schema which imports DC and REC.
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
|