> > From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
> > > > And the cql context set -- do we assume that its version is the same
> > > > as the cql version?
> > > I don't think that's a good idea. Clients that care enough to want to
> > Oh :( Actually, as 'cql' is reserved and can only ever point at the
> > current CQL set [...]
> Really?! Reference, please. I thought I was quite at liberty to say
> >cql="http://loc.gov/indexes/dublinCore" cql.title=dinosaur
(my 'reserved' take)
(not actually reserved discussion)
I've always considered the old SRW set to be 'reserved', but searching the
list reveals that it was 'well known', the implication being that unless
it was assigned to something else, it should be the CQL set.
Shall we make -that- more explicit in the documentation?
For the current discussion, however, I agree that assigning to CQL doesn't
do anything about version issues. (Unless we make 'cql', or some
other token, reserved for real)
In ZeeRex, I would say:
And then make it mandatory to include the CQL set if you support it.
<set identifier="..." name="cql"/>
And by extension, making it also mandatory to declare the DC schema if
supported, a reversal of what we said earlier.
<schema name="dc" .../>
> CQL Context Set
> Record Metadata Context Set
The context set will live at the LC site, where its identifier is. And (as
yesterday) the srw.o-r-g.org site will still exist as there's no reason to
get rid of the host name, but I'd prefer srw.cheshire3.org. The
Identifier will definitely change.
,'/:. Dr Robert Sanderson ([log in to unmask])
,'--/::(@)::. Special Collections and Archives, extension 3142
,'---/::::::::::. Nebmedes: http://nebmedes.o-r-g.org:8000/
I L L U M I N A T I