On Tue, 16 Dec 2003, Mike Taylor wrote:
> > From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>

> > > It sounds like you're slipping from context sets into profiles.

> > But if a relation modifier (for example) simply requires extra data to be
> > returned for it to be useful, why does the client also have to request
> > that extra data separately?

> I am inclined to agree, even though it makes me uneasy.  I think we
> should all be careful to bear Ralph's warning in mind as we design
> these babies, though: let's not slip from context-sets to profiles
> accidentally.

I'll put that in big red flashing neon in the documentation for each.
(Okay, maybe not big red flashing neon, but I'll put it in!)

We thus also need a 'profiles' section in the documentation.

> All comments are welcome.

Something you weren't to know, but I'm going to migrate all my SRW stuff
into for 1.1  (as o-r-g (online-roleplaying-games!) is
hardly the most appropriate place for it (with the possible exception of
the L5R database, I guess))

So can you relink the record metadata set as
(even though that link says that the identifier is still the old one,
I'll update that today as well)

WRT the Explain section, I have two responses.

Answer 1:
ZeeRex does support saying that the database supports a profile in 2.0
with  <supports type="profile">zthes</supports>

Answer 2:
If you support the ZThes schema, and all the indexes, then you support the
profile.  All of this can be expressed in ZeeRex (obviously).


      ,'/:.          Dr Robert Sanderson ([log in to unmask])
  ,'--/::(@)::.      Special Collections and Archives, extension 3142
,'---/::::::::::.    Nebmedes: