 |
 |
> The W in SRW is Web (or Web Service), after all, but it is > true that SOAP > isn't dependant on HTTP as the protocol. On the other hand, > the database > is specified as a URI rather than an HTTP path, I thought ... > if I had an > FTP protocol SOAP server, I could have a database at > ftp://srw.o-r-g.org/pub/moo/ > in much the same way as I could have it at > http://srw.o-r-g.org:8080/l5r/ > > (Though that does bring up a question of modeling in Zeerex, I admit) > (SRF: Search/Retrieve over FTP? :)) > > I can see that Matthew's music searching database, which IIRC > can't match > quickly enough to be able to respond before an http timeout, > would benefit > from SOAP over email. Well, I've regarded SRW as being SR WebService to allow layering SRW over any SOAP transport as applicable. Although clearly for interoperability SRW over HTTP will (should) be the norm. I've some experiments using SMTP for the music searching - and of course the database can be speficied in the e-mail endpoint in the similar manner that it can be included in the URL for HTTP (e.g. [log in to unmask] ). What worries me about the multiple database requirement (rather than the technical rights, wrongs and technicalities) is whether this will actually be implemented. When I was working with the JISC "Clump" project back in the late-90's, the toolkits being used tended not to make use of the capability of searhcing multiple databases in a single query, and few, if any, of the servers being search actually supported it. Matthew