> > I do not have SRW on my fingertips, but I belive that there is no such
> > 'reserved' tag inside the 'extraRecordData' tag, and if it is not
> > defined by the standard, we are back to the problems of approach a).
I think we have all the tools we need to do this (and we don't need
"reserved" tags), but we really should nail it down a little better since
this is important for the metasearch initiative.
I just took a look and Rob has already defined "score" in his metadata set,
http://srw.cheshire3.org/schemas/rec/1.0/, schema at
I suggest that we agree on a normalization range, say 0-1 as suggested, and
modify the definition as such.
(I don't think there's a need to be able to specify different
normalizations, and that just makes the metadata more complex -- e.g.
<extraRecordData> <rec:score rec="info:srw/schema/2/rec-1.0">
</rec:score> </extraRecordData> )
We still need a way to request the metadata.
For example, we could define:
where the extension identifier explicitly means you're requesting the
specified metadata, in this case score.
the above though, only if we establish an association between this
extension id and Rob's metadata set.
More flexibile would be:
where info:srw/schema/xx/yyyyy identifies some metadata namespace and
score is an element of that namespace.
Is this what we have in mind?