[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [search-ws] OASIS/SRU: ATOM/SRU Response Schema
Please see comments inline below.. My feeling is that we need to narrow the options down some more rather than just sending an enumeration of every combination. I can live with the email as drafted if necessary. Thanks Ray. Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress wrote: ... > There are variations to this proposal, for example both formats could be > mandatory. Or an implementation would have to support at least one but not > both (on the theory that if a client supports one and server the other, then > they probably weren't meant to interoperate). > > So the possibilities are: > 1. ATOM mandatory, SRU optional. > Suggest replacing above with: "1. ATOM mandatory, SRU optional and marked as deprecated. This indicates that a future version of SRU will likely drop support for it." > 2. Support for both formats mandatory. > 3. Support for the SRU format mandatory, ATOM optional. > 4. Must support at least one of the two, SRUor ATOM. (The explain record > would indicate what formats are supported.) > 5. No mandatory response format. (Explain.) > Above is really quite unworkable for interop. Suggest dropping it if possible. > 6. Server must support both SRU and ATOM, and client at least one. > Above is really redundant with (2). Also this spec should not make any demands on the client other than it should be designed to work the SRU interface. > 7. Client must support both SRU and ATOM, and server at least one. > (Explain.) > IMHO, above does not make sense to include. Also this spec should not make any demands on the client other than it should be designed to work the SRU interface. > Note that there is a new request parameter proposed, 'responseFormat', so > the client can indicate which format it wants. > > In any case, a "flavor" of ATOM would be specified in the standard which > would call out (namespaced) elements similar to those in the current SRU > schema -- globally: <version>, <numberOfRecords>; and per record: > <recordSchema>, <recordPacking>, <recordPosition>. So the full > functionality of the SRU response schema can be provided. > > The TC solicits ideas from SRU implementors on this issue. > -- Regards, Farrukh Najmi Web: http://www.wellfleetsoftware.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]