To summarize a clever idea of Jeff Young (OCLC):
If there was a record creation and record identifier index, plus
optionally an oai.set scannable index and/or an oai_dc recordSchema, you
could seamlessly expose the SRW database via OAI.
Jeff's original plan was to have oai.identifier, oai.datestamp and
oai.set, but recently we've talked about dc.identifier with a scope
of record metadata (as opposed to OAI's use of 'metadata' meaning record)
oai.set isn't contentious, even though the semantics are similar to that
of cql.resultSetId, as we don't have any defined semantics for scanning
that special index (among other reasons)
But recently there has also been the discussion regarding dublin core as
record schema and dublin core as defining semantics for indexes.
It seems like a very good time to make a decision about all of this, such
that we don't end up with many many context sets all defining something
called 'title' or some defining 'author', some 'creator', some
'personName' etc. etc. multiple times, once at each metadata level they
can think of.
Rob
,'/:. Dr Robert Sanderson ([log in to unmask])
,'-/::::. http://www.o-r-g.org/~azaroth/
,'--/::(@)::. Special Collections and Archives, extension 3142
,'---/::::::::::. University of Liverpool
____/:::::::::::::. L5R Shop: http://www.cardsnotwords.com/
I L L U M I N A T I
