On Tue, 3 Jun 2003, Ray Denenberg wrote:
> Robert Sanderson wrote:
> > Shall we shelve the multiple database issue until the NISO group come up
> > with a specific list of requirements?  Is this reasonable for us to expect
> > them to actually do?

> As to the first question, of course we shouldn't develop a solution
> without knowing the requirements, but as to the second, no, they're not
> going to develop requirements that are meaningful in an SRW or Z39.50
> doesn't serve either group well. As suggested earlier we need to meet
> with these folks. (I'm working on a meeting.)

Excellent :)  In which case, we (the list as a whole) can shelve it until
after the meeting.  If it's to be an open(ish) meeting, let us know when
and where ... I'll be in the States again in July, for example, and might
be able to participate if I know the details in advance.

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