John Harrison writes:
> A brief pre-sequiter:
> Is there a general objection to the SRU DC schema allowing
> inclusion of elements from other schemas, and if so what is it?
There is an objection to _the_ SRU DC scehma allowing inclusion of
elements from other namespaces(*), but that objections is only that
the SRU DC schema is already defined and changing the definition is
usually not a great thing to do.
But I at least would have no objection to adding support for another
schema, the DC-plus-elements-from-other-namespaces schema. Heck, I
might even use it some time.
But note that this alone will _not_ solve the problem of allowing
price information to be communicated along with Dublin Core data. All
it will do is allow price information to be _sent_. In order for it
to be communicated, the client needs to understand what's being sent;
and that means more than just "supports the DC extended schema", it
means that it recognises and knows how to interpret the specific
additional element that your server sends.
/o ) \/ Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]> http://www.miketaylor.org.uk
)_v__/\ "About every three or four months I realize that I've spent
my entire life up until 'now' being a dumbass; the problem is
that 'now' keeps moving and every time I think I've finally got
everything figured out, I later determine that I was/am still
a moron. I distinctly remember having this feeling for the first
time in third grade, age of eight, and I keep hoping it will
eventually go away, but that hope seems increasingly unfounded"
-- Matt Wedel.
(*) Elements don't come from schemas, they come from namespaces. At
least, there is a sense in which they come from schemas, but no way in
XML to say "the title element from the heraldry schema" as there is to
say "the title element from the heraldry namespace".