>>> [log in to unmask] 08-08-2005 13:30 >>>
>What's to stop us defining a (potentially infinite) group of new
>schemas, each identified by a URI of the form
>each of which represents METS records using that nominated schema?
Wouldn't it be simpler to let the reponse automatically be wrapped when
asking for a combination of schemas like recordSchema="dc+rec"? This
wiil keep the number of potental record schemas limited.