At 04:21 PM 8/30/2004, Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress wrote: >I believe SRW needs a utility index set. > > If we have an index, say, 'identifier', in a utility set, we can >qualify/scope it (see note below) however we want. I agree strongly with Ray's idea. It seems to me this would position SRW to support a variety of contexts that are already out there but would be difficult to incorporate otherwise, e.g., the Microsoft Office properties, the UDDI business and service elements... A while ago, I drafted at http://wwww.gils.net/base.html a context called "base" (but could be part of "utility" or the "cql" context). It would have the following eight indexes: category - a collection of things sharing a common attribute date - a day within a particular calendar year identifier - a character string that distinguishes a person, place, thing, concept or grouping location - an identifier of a particular place or position in which a person or something is name - a word or phrase that constitutes the distinctive designation of a person, place, thing or concept organization - a name of a body composed of individual people and/or legal entities, having an orderly structure to fulfill a purpose person - a name of an individual human being type - an identifier of the type of the described information resource I would like to suggest again that these indexes intended for re-use be regarded as refinements of the ServerChoice index already defined in the cql context set.