> > 1) One that allows you to request a record according to the SRU/SRW
> > prtocol. This is the one we talking about, but we do not yet have a way
> > to fetch it except embedded in CQL.
> > 2) A recordid (URI) that brings you the original record in the native
> > interface
> This does not sound like a confusion we should be perpetuating.

I agree.

If you want to fetch the record outside of SRW/SRU, then feel free to add
an element to your record giving its location. But as it is outside of
SRW/SRU, then it falls outside the scope of SRW/SRU.

We can put links to the 'native' interface (by which I assume you mean a
web search interface other than SRW/SRU) in Explain. If you want to put it
in the data for the link to the individual record, then go for it.

As I replied to Bill, we have mechanisms already to do this within SRW.
And doing things not within SRW is by definition out of scope.

The -real- issue here though is in scope -- that we can't carry record
metadata outside of the record data, and can't request record metadata in
a different schema to the data.  This -is- an issue which we need to
solve, and will likely solve the record URI issue in the same breath.
I don't have a proposal, although I did talk about it with Matthew briefly
at JCDL, as the obvious solution is not very elegant. (To have a record
metadata field under <record>, a metadataSchema request parameter, a slew
of diagnostics, and so forth)


      ,'/:.          Rob Sanderson ([log in to unmask])
  ,'--/::(@)::.      Special Collections and Archives, extension 3142
,'---/::::::::::.    Twin Cathedrals:  telnet: 7777
____/:::::::::::::.              WWW: