>>> [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
>        http://loc.gov/sru/mets/<path-to-some-other-schema>
>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.

Theo