sru version

["Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress" <rden@loc.gov>]

Matthew you said (on the SRU list):

"iii) for servers running multiple versions the idea is that the client goes
first for the explain record (which would be at a single URL and cover all
versions)"

In the example, you suggested that you could have a 2.0 server at

               http://myserver/mysru/version2.0

and a 2.1 server at

               http://myserver/mysru/version2.1


This needs discussion. 

You are suggesting that an explain record would be at
 http://myserver/mysru/
and it would cover both servers.  

And/Or, I presume, there could separate explain records, one for each
server. One each at:  
http://myserver/mysru/version2.0 and http://myserver/mysru/version2.1

But the suggestion (and the list discussion) seems to imply that in the case
where there are multiple servers on a base url, that there be some sort of
naming convention for the path names that hang off of the base url, like in
the above example, 'version2.0' and 'version2.1'. That's a somewhat
troubling assumption (to me).  There should be no reason why you couldn't
have completely opaque names for your servers, e.g. 

http://myserver/mysru/cat  for version 2.0 and 
http://myserver/mysru/dog   for version 2.2

  On the other hand, we have been almost completely silent about how a
client goes about finding out where the different SRU version are.  

Let's put this on the agenda for Monday.

--Ray