Both, I guess. We'll need an extension mechanism for it to work in 1.1 and
then have it be a natural part of 1.2.
Braindead clients forget things, like the explain response that they just
had in their hands. The response to a search does not contain the name of
the database that was searched. It does not contain the list of indexes
that might be used to refine the search. It does not contain the list of
alternate schemas that might be used to retrieve any records.
But, if the base URL had been returned, the braindead client could have
asked for the Explain record again and incorporated that data into the
search response. (There is a method in XSLT for going off and getting
another record dynamically and using it as part of the original record.)
<Warning>Cache your explain records! They are going to be asked for after
every other type of interaction.</Warning>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Sanderson [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 10:47 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Database URL in EchoedRequests
> > Nope, I think you've got me there.
> > I'm ready to vote to return the base URL in all our responses.
> Via an extension, or in 1.2?
> Can you summarise what you're trying to achieve and why you
> need the base
> ,'/:. Dr Robert Sanderson ([log in to unmask])
> ,'-/::::. http://www.o-r-g.org/~azaroth/
> ,'--/::(@)::. Special Collections and Archives, extension 3142
> ,'---/::::::::::. Nebmedes: http://nebmedes.o-r-g.org:8000/
> I L L U M I N A T I