Robert Sanderson wrote:
> To summarize a clever idea of Jeff Young (OCLC):
> If there was a record creation and record identifier index, plus
> optionally an oai.set scannable index and/or an oai_dc recordSchema, you
> could seamlessly expose the SRW database via OAI.
> Jeff's original plan was to have oai.identifier, oai.datestamp and
> oai.set, but recently we've talked about dc.identifier with a scope
> of record metadata (as opposed to OAI's use of 'metadata' meaning record)
> oai.set isn't contentious, even though the semantics are similar to that
> of cql.resultSetId, as we don't have any defined semantics for scanning
> that special index (among other reasons)
> But recently there has also been the discussion regarding dublin core as
> record schema and dublin core as defining semantics for indexes.
> It seems like a very good time to make a decision about all of this, such
> that we don't end up with many many context sets all defining something
> called 'title' or some defining 'author', some 'creator', some
> 'personName' etc. etc. multiple times, once at each metadata level they
> can think of.
For what its worth, a year or so ago I developed a "Z39.50 OAI Gateway
Profile" for a project at the UIUC library. The text of the profile is
The idea was to be able to develop a gateway between classic Z39.50 and
OAI. Many of the issues would probably be the same for developing a
gateway between SRW/U and OAI.
I never did pursue the idea much beyond the research project for which
it was developed. However, I did develop an open source implementation
of a Z39.50 to OAI gateway called ZMARCO which was developed in
conjunction with the profile.