 |
 |
I agree completely. I was not referring to a particular case, but there are some cases where I would have liked a lower implementation barrier like for example distributing a single user query to heterogenious services and letting the services respond with the best they can offer. Theo >>> [log in to unmask] 28-6-04 12:01:06 >>> > I am in favour of lowering the implementation barrier for > clients but I don't think that is the same as encouraging > people to write bad clients. Maybe it helps bad client > writers to write better clients -:) Increasing the > implementation barrier makes it more difficult to write good clients. We agree with that - however there are certain things which whilst lowering the barrier are also "bad" For instance: i) using XML rather than BER is a good way of lowering the implementation barrier ii) insisting (or implying) that the namespace prefix for SRW is always srw so that a client can do regular expression matching on srw:searchRetreiveResponse rather than looking for and using the prefix defined in an xmlns: also lowers the implementation barrier but is "bad" Matthew