I assume that some of you, if not all, know that Microsoft appears to be 
planning to bundle A9 into IE7.  Instant ubiquitous clientspace.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Matthew J. Dovey" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2006 10:29 AM
Subject: FW: [OpenSearch Discuss] OpenSearch discussed at March SRU meeting




> -----Original Message-----
> From: [log in to unmask]
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Michael Fagan
> Sent: 06 April 2006 02:06
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [OpenSearch Discuss] OpenSearch discussed at March
> SRU meeting
>
> I know there are some SRU people already on this list, but I
> didn't see this until today:
>
> http://www.loc.gov/standards/sru/march06-meeting/report.html
>
> "The strategy we discussed is to make OpenSearch requests
> legitimate SRU requests. Then an SRU-friendly OS server will
> be able to do something intelligent when it gets an
> SRU-loaded OS request."
>
> One of their big concerns seems to be that OpenSearch's "searchTerms"
> is loosely defined, compared to CQL
> <http://www.loc.gov/standards/sru/cql/>. My idea of how to
> handle this is as suggested over here:
> <http://opensearch.a9.com/docs/devfaq.jsp#structured>.
>
> Have an OpenSearch Description include something like this:
>
> <Url type="application/rss+xml" xmlns:sru="http://example.com/sru"
>
> template="http://example.com/search?q={searchTerms?}&cql={sru:cql}" />
>
> Ignore for the moment that a different namespace would be
> used, and that SRU has fixed GET variable names. A
> CQL-supporting service could then send CQL queries, and ones
> that had no idea what CQL is would send "searchTerms." Seems
> like a pretty good solution to me.
>
> Michael
> http://www.faganfinder.com/wp/
>
> = [ Opensearch.org Discuss mailing list ]
> ========http://opensearch.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss/
> Unsubscribe on the web page, or [log in to unmask]
> Problems?  Reach a human at [log in to unmask]
>