I think backwards compatibility for SRU is a bogeyman and can be safely
ignored. There's just not enough deployment for it to be significant.

Ralph

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Sanderson [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Monday, April 07, 2003 6:27 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Betr.: Re: XML Fragment in RecordData
>
>
> > As far as I remember we agreed XML to be the default for SRU.
>
> Not me. I still think that backwards compatability is more
> important than
> requiring SRU clients to tack on a static parameter on the
> end of their
> queries for convenience.
>
> R
>
> --
> ,'/:. 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
>