Print

Print


Theo van Veen wrote:
> I would be in favour of allowing a post next to a get, but not replacing
> it. In explain it can be expressed whether  post is also supported.
>

Servers are introduced that are SRU only . IIRC servers were supposed to
support both.

So we are in a situation where clients are faced with not one , but two
protocols in order to operate.. Seems silly to me.

If SRW and SOAP was sufficiently easy to work with, all servers would
have supported that. They don't.

If SRU also now has a POST variant we have 2,5 protocols..

IMHO, we should depricate the SOAP/SRW combo - despite the fact it was a
sound solution..

/ Adam

> Theo
>
>
>>>>[log in to unmask] 14-12-2004 15:19 >>>
>
> I notice that one of the features mentioned in the proposed Adlib base
> profile is "the SRU protocol, i.e., HTTP GET/POST CGI requests".
>
> This reminds me of a discussion I had with Adam and some other Index
> Data people a few days ago: is it possible to POST an SRU request
> instead of GETting it?  It seems to me that it _should_ be, but there
> are pragmatic reason why it might not be the best thing.
>
> What saith the scriptures?  Not very much as it turns out:
> http://www.loc.gov/z3950/agency/zing/srw/sru.html
>
>         SRU, the Search and Retrieve URL Service, is a companion
>         service to SRW, the Search and Retrieve Web Service. Its
>         primary difference is its access mechanism: SRU is a simple
>         HTTP GET form of the service. The request is encoded within
>         the URL, much like OpenURL, in contrast to SRW where an XML
>         document is sent to the server.
>
> That's all.  And yet there seems no compelling reason why I should get
> allowed to do:
>
>         GET
> /services/l5r?operation=searchRetrieve&version=1.1&query=sword&maximumRecords=10
> HTTP/1.1
>         Host: srw.cheshire3.org
>
> and not:
>
>         POST /services/l5r HTTP/1.1
>         Host: srw.cheshire3.org
>         Content-length: 67
>
>
> operation=searchRetrieve&version=1.1&query=sword&maximumRecords=10
>
> Why is this important?  Because of the real, imagined and
> implementation-dependent limits on URL length.  Les Wibberley's famous
> search-terms that are 10,000-node chemical formulae are not going to
> fare well under SRU-GET.
>
>  _/|_
> _______________________________________________________________
> /o ) \/  Mike Taylor  <[log in to unmask]>
> http://www.miketaylor.org.uk
> )_v__/\  "I think it should either be unrestricted garnishing, or a
>          single Olympic standard mayonaisse" -- Monty Python.
>
> --
> Listen to free demos of soundtrack music for film, TV and radio
>         http://www.pipedreaming.org.uk/soundtrack/
>