> The W in SRW is Web (or Web Service), after all, but it is
> true that SOAP
> isn't dependant on HTTP as the protocol. On the other hand,
> the database
> is specified as a URI rather than an HTTP path, I thought ...
> if I had an
> FTP protocol SOAP server, I could have a database at
> in much the same way as I could have it at
> (Though that does bring up a question of modeling in Zeerex, I admit)
> (SRF: Search/Retrieve over FTP? :))
> I can see that Matthew's music searching database, which IIRC
> can't match
> quickly enough to be able to respond before an http timeout,
> would benefit
> from SOAP over email.
Well, I've regarded SRW as being SR WebService to allow layering SRW over
any SOAP transport as applicable. Although clearly for interoperability SRW
over HTTP will (should) be the norm. I've some experiments using SMTP for
the music searching - and of course the database can be speficied in the
e-mail endpoint in the similar manner that it can be included in the URL for
HTTP (e.g. [log in to unmask] ).
What worries me about the multiple database requirement (rather than the
technical rights, wrongs and technicalities) is whether this will actually
be implemented. When I was working with the JISC "Clump" project back in the
late-90's, the toolkits being used tended not to make use of the capability
of searhcing multiple databases in a single query, and few, if any, of the
servers being search actually supported it.