>>> [log in to unmask] 12-12-03 11:21:31 >>>
On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, Mike Taylor wrote:
>> > From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
>> > You /can/ do this. Just assign it a URI, put it in your Explain
>> > record and Robert's your father's brother.
>>
>> Well, that gives Theo the ability to have his clients _request_ the
>> DCX schema, which is half of what he wants.  The other half, if I
>> understand him correctly, is that he he wants to have a situation
>> where a client asks for the DC schema, or the CIMI schema, or
>> whatever, and the server unilaterally says, "No can do, but here's
a
>> DCX record".  (Right, Theo?)
>>
>> Now in out-of-the-box SRW/U, that's illegal.  But it's precisely
the
>> sort of requirement for which we introduced extraRequestData.
Theo,
>> what you need to do for this is:
>
>Ahh, yes, I agree with Mike's analysis of the requirements for
returning
>DCX unasked for.
>
>> Is that clear?  Does everyone agree with it?  Should this example
of
>> how to use extensions be documented somewhere on the SRW/U
web-site?
>
>Probably.  I'll add an example page linked from the extensions page.
>

If the impression is that I would like to return DCX unasked for, than
I did not make myself clear enough. Only when the client asks for DCX
the server may respond with DCX as name of the record schema but also
with any other name as long as it is DCX, so the client can use his DCX
stylesheet.

Theo