 |
 |
I think describing Z39.50 and SRU/SRW in two separate explain documents is appropriate -- given the fact that search capabilities offered via Z39.50 can be very different from search capabilities offered via SRU/SRW. http://www.loc.gov/z3950/lcdbz3950.xml http://www.loc.gov/z3950/LCzeerex.xml My 2 cents. Larry On Tue, 21 Dec 2004, Mike Taylor wrote: > > Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 09:08:34 +0000 > > From: Dr Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]> > >> > >>> In the Z39.50 service you publish the record for the Z39.50 > >>> service in IR-Explain---1. In the SRW/SRU you publish the SRW/U > >>> record at the base URL. > >> > >> Yep. So two explain documents for a SRW/SRU/Z39.50 server that > >> features exactly the same resource behind it (Z39.50 supports > >> CQL+XML), due to non-repeatable serverInfo. > > > > Not to put too fine a point on it, but I don't think this will be > > very common ;) And even if it does become common, it's not > > outlandish to have one record for Z39.50 and a different one for > > SRW/U. > > Hmm. To represent three closely related services, I would expect > either to need one record or three. To need two does seem perverse. > > I am slowly being persuaded towards multiple <serverInfo>s. > > _/|_ _______________________________________________________________ > /o ) \/ Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]> http://www.miketaylor.org.uk > )_v__/\ "Fighting drugs is nearly as big a business as pushing them" > -- Gore Vidal. > ------------------------------------------------------------ Larry E. Dixson Internet: [log in to unmask] Network Development and MARC Standards Office, LM639 Library of Congress Telephone: (202) 707-5807 Washington, D.C. 20540-4402 Fax: (202) 707-0115