I think having a separate parameter to specify the the schema of the
response would be a good thing.
I have previously suggested naming this parameter "x-responseFormat",
e.g. x-responseFormat=rss, but perhaps "x-responseSchema" would be more
consistent?
Martin
Theo van Veen wrote:
> You're right. I was a little bit too hasty. Sorry.
> I agree that when another response format is requested there are still
> different recordSchemas possible, so a new parameter is needed. In fact
> we did use such a parameter in a previous version of our SRU service for
> server side XSLT transformations.
>
> Theo
>
>
> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: SRU (Search and Retrieve Via URL) Implementors [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Namens Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress
> Verzonden: vrijdag 15 juni 2007 15:27
> Aan: [log in to unmask]
> Onderwerp: Re: June 18-19 meeting topics.... RSS
>
>> From: "Theo van Veen" <[log in to unmask]>
>> I know that there are also wishes to return Json as SRU response. It
> is
>> however possible to create this possible by an intermediate service
> without
>> effecting SRU and this might even be better. On the other hand it
> would
>> increase acceptance of SRU if the requested record schema's would
> allow
>> responses like RSS, Json etc. without the SRU-envelope.
>> I'm not offended either by allowing record schema's to cause SRU
> servers
> to
>> return non-SRU responses. I would however discourage the introduction
> of
> yet
>> another parameter if there is already a parameter (recordSchema) that
> we
> can
>> use for this purpose.
>
> Setting aside for the moment the other issues raised by this message, I
> do
> want to point out that recordSchema CANNOT be used for this purpose.
>
> --Ray
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin Morrey, Product Director, Intrallect, http://www.intrallect.com
[log in to unmask], Tel: +44 870 234 3933, Fax: +44 1506 505 117
----------------------------------------------------------------------
|