More that that though...
If you have a format that can use to present record data, or you can use it
to present record metadata, then if you specify that schema in the request,
how is the server to know which of the two you're asking for? Hence my
suggestion to assign two different identifiers for the two different roles.
Does that not make sense?
And that's one of two reason. The other reason is to be able to distinguish
in explain which of the two you support, if you support one but not the
From: SRU (Search and Retrieve Via URL) Implementors [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Dr R. Sanderson
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2007 10:19 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Record Metadata Schema
I'll claim that.
I certainly wouldn't want to try to display a record which was natively in
(say) SVG in a record metadata schema... I'd want to display the metadata
about that record in that schema.
On Tue, 8 May 2007, LeVan,Ralph wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: SRU (Search and Retrieve Via URL) Implementors
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>> On Behalf Of Ray Denenberg
>> Two. If you list marcXML in explain as a supported record schema, but
>> only support one of these, similarly you need a way to distinguish,
>> similarly, assigning distinct identifiers is a clear and painess way.
> But you clearly support both schemas for your records, so they should
> both be listed in the explain record.
> Are you claiming that there are schemas that you would use for
> metadata that you couldn't use for the data itself?