> -----Original Message-----
> From: Z39.50 Next-Generation Initiative [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
> Mike Taylor
> ... and it's insufficient because it doesn't allow a client to specify
> more complex record structures such as schema A contained in schema B
> contained in schema C.
And there's where I think I'm ready to draw the line.
The beauty of what we have now is that the server tells the client what
it can do and the client picks from among the options. This arbitrary
mix and match idea is just too much complexity.
I'm happy with servers having their own identifiers for local record
schemas that incorporate elements from other schemas. I'd be in favor
of a proposal that allowed an Explain record to describe the contents of
that local schema. But I think the current flock of proposals goes too
Ralph (the curmudgeon)