> Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 09:46:19 +0100
> From: "Matthew J. Dovey" <[log in to unmask]>
>
>> What about SRU, which doesn't have any convenient place to put this
>> information? It's just out of luck?
>
> If a 1.1 server gets a parameter defined in 1.1 but not in 1.0 then
> it knows it is dealing with a 1.1 client and can return the
> appropriate response.

An observation: if this approach will work for SRU, then it will also
work for SRW, and we'd then not have to bother at all with all the
namespace stuff that Rob objects to.  I am not necessarily arguing
that this would be a _good_ way to go about things, only that it is
feasible.

... It occurs to me that servers that support both SWU and SRW (do
most servers fall into that category?) will need to implement two
different versioning schemes if we do use namespaces for that purpose
in SRW.  That seems wrong.  So maybe for both SRW and SRU, we should
just have servers respond according to the highest protocol level they
can tell the client to support?  (And SRW request packets could
include a <whatProtocolVersionISupport>1.2</whatProtocolVersionISupport>
element.)

 _/|_    _______________________________________________________________
/o ) \/  Mike Taylor  <[log in to unmask]>  http://www.miketaylor.org.uk
)_v__/\  "God's not interested in how many meetings you go to" --
         C. J. Mahaney.

--
Listen to my wife's new CD of kids' music, _Child's Play_, at
        http://www.pipedreaming.org.uk/childsplay/