> This fails if
> a) You want to hit different dbs with different queries
Discussable, but ...
> and/or (and this is the tougher one)
> b) You want individual hit-counts rather than a single count, as was
> assumed in Z39.50 (at least without additional search info)
.. this looks like a killer argument against it. At least it has me
convinced :) I can think of plenty of times when I'd want to know how
many results came from each database.
Can I also add:
c) Even if you want to send the same -query- to each database, it's very
unlikely that you'd want to retrieve the same -record schema-.
If one of the databases doesn't have the requested schema, even if it has
matching records, it'll fail with an Unsupported Schema for Retrieval
diagnostic. You'll also want to know the resultset name for each
database if you're going to try to retrieve the record again directly from
> > > The Search Options paper also addresses this concern. The desire is
> > > to search multiple databases with a single XML query.
> >What would be wrong with having a database index in CQL for doing this (and
> >hasn't this been discussed before?)
,'/:. Rob Sanderson ([log in to unmask])
,'--/::(@)::. 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