> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ray Denenberg [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2004 10:58 AM
> From: "LeVan,Ralph" <[log in to unmask]>
> > Right now, SRW (and Z39.50) servers support the simplifying
> > assumption that complex title searching can be represented
> > as DC.title searching. If this simplification is confusing,
> > then we should simply stop doing it.
> The simplification is confusing and we should stop doing it, for srw.
So, you think it would be better to present the users with alternateTitle,
uniformTitle, spineTitle, runningTitle, subTitle indexes? Or better yet,
100$o, 110$o, 130$a, 240$a, 242$a, 245$a, 245$b, 245$c, 245$h, 245$n, 245$p
and so on for the 51 fields that I index as "title".
How can you possibly think that's better?