ZNG Archives – January 2004

1. 1-1
   • 1-1 (17 lines)
     From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 10:54:57 -0500
   • Re: 1-1 (26 lines)
     From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 16:43:51 GMT

2. A flaw in the examples
   • A flaw in the examples (14 lines)
     From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 13:59:50 -0500

3. acknowledgements
   • acknowledgements (14 lines)
     From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 15:58:07 -0500
   • Re: acknowledgements (25 lines)
     From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 11:11:55 GMT

4. authentication token extension
   • authentication token extension (21 lines)
     From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 15:52:04 -0500
   • Re: authentication token extension (29 lines)
     From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 22:24:26 GMT
   • Re: authentication token extension (39 lines)
     From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 17:51:47 -0500
   • Re: authentication token extension (47 lines)
     From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 09:07:42 GMT
   • Re: authentication token extension (31 lines)
     From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 11:44:07 +0000
   • Re: authentication token extension (56 lines)
     From: Janifer Gatenby <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2004 10:56:13 +0100
   • Re: authentication token extension (28 lines)
     From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 14:19:59 +0000

5. Base Message Type
   • Base Message Type (15 lines)
     From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 13:08:43 -0500

6. base profile explain support (Re: requirements and expectations)
   • base profile explain support (Re: requirements and expectations) (22 lines)
     From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 19:00:34 -0500

7. Betr.: character unit
   • Betr.: character unit (21 lines)
     From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 13:20:41 +0100

8. Betr.: DC (etc) schema namespace
   • Betr.: DC (etc) schema namespace (42 lines)
     From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 14:57:26 +0100

9. Betr.: extension or extension-space
   • Betr.: extension or extension-space (87 lines)
     From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 16:28:20 +0100

10. Betr.: First and Last Terms in Index
    • Betr.: First and Last Terms in Index (63 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 15:53:21 +0100
    • Betr.: First and Last Terms in Index (83 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 16:05:10 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: First and Last Terms in Index (35 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 15:06:12 +0000
    • Re: Betr.: First and Last Terms in Index (24 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 10:25:26 -0500
    • Re: Betr.: First and Last Terms in Index (40 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 17:00:10 +0100

11. Betr.: new home pate
    • Betr.: new home pate (33 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 12:16:08 +0100

12. Betr.: please review 1.1 specs
    • Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (57 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 15:57:09 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (21 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 10:10:58 -0500
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (40 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 10:25:38 -0500
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (61 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 15:17:47 +0000
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (21 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 10:39:39 -0500
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (44 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 10:17:54 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (43 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 09:28:55 -0000
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (39 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 09:24:34 +0000
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (36 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 09:46:58 +0000
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (30 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 10:12:30 -0000
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (32 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 13:31:50 GMT
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (39 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 15:11:00 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (25 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 15:59:28 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (42 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 15:05:57 -0000
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (33 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 15:03:04 +0000
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (41 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 16:57:56 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (87 lines)
      From: Janifer Gatenby <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 17:08:56 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (29 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 16:08:20 +0000
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (89 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 17:30:16 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (27 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 16:26:27 +0000
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (50 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 16:54:32 GMT
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (52 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 14:52:22 -0500
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (39 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 14:57:00 -0500
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (70 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 21:02:10 -0000
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (62 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:08:44 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (27 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 18:40:41 -0500
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (36 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 23:45:14 GMT
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (32 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 01:11:22 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (52 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 10:39:31 GMT
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (84 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 11:08:23 -0000
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (110 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 12:50:07 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (28 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 11:44:03 +0000
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (32 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 11:47:54 +0000
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (15 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 12:16:09 -0000
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (50 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 07:30:41 -0500
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (30 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 12:48:49 +0000
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (49 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 08:20:12 -0500
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (43 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 08:21:54 -0500
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (39 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 11:28:31 +0000
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (55 lines)
      From: Janifer Gatenby <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 14:38:13 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (42 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 13:26:04 +0000
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (82 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 15:19:49 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (44 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 14:24:59 +0000
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (73 lines)
      From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 15:49:56 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (60 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 09:58:22 -0500
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (44 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 14:53:22 +0000
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (43 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 14:59:27 +0000
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (20 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 10:20:07 -0500
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (77 lines)
      From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 17:47:43 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (44 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 17:00:02 GMT
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (45 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 17:01:15 GMT
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (59 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 17:19:06 +0000
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (40 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:49:20 GMT
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (64 lines)
      From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 16:17:48 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (31 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 16:24:00 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (38 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 15:35:18 GMT
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (44 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 15:28:24 +0000
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (26 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 17:10:08 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (35 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 16:24:08 GMT
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (22 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 11:32:51 -0500
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (28 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 16:50:07 GMT
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (42 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 16:41:48 +0000
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (52 lines)
      From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 18:02:05 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (62 lines)
      From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 18:08:28 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (20 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 17:10:28 -0000
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (24 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 17:00:28 +0000
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (85 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 17:23:43 -0000
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (37 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 17:15:23 +0000
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (35 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 17:34:49 GMT
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (97 lines)
      From: Janifer Gatenby <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 19:00:35 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (34 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 17:52:50 +0000
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (58 lines)
      From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 22:46:04 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (33 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 10:24:32 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (41 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 10:29:10 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (45 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 09:45:20 GMT
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (84 lines)
      From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 12:01:40 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (57 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 12:03:49 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (33 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 12:42:20 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (38 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 12:22:59 GMT
    • Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs (42 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 14:46:48 +0100

13. Betr.: profiles and extensions (Re: register extra data)
    • Betr.: profiles and extensions (Re: register extra data) (39 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 10:10:46 +0100

14. Betr.: Re: Database URL in EchoedRequests
    • Betr.: Re: Database URL in EchoedRequests (40 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 09:53:18 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: Re: Database URL in EchoedRequests (79 lines)
      From: Oldroyd, Bill <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 09:49:49 -0000
    • Re: Betr.: Re: Database URL in EchoedRequests (100 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 11:06:45 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: Re: Database URL in EchoedRequests (36 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 12:42:03 GMT

15. Betr.: Re: dc collection
    • Betr.: Re: dc collection (101 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 10:16:37 +0100
    • Betr.: Re: dc collection (33 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 16:54:58 +0100

16. Betr.: Re: dc schema
    • Betr.: Re: dc schema (72 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 12:40:09 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: Re: dc schema (115 lines)
      From: Oldroyd, Bill <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 12:20:29 -0000
    • Betr.: Re: dc schema (41 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:49:01 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: Re: dc schema (53 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 07:53:22 -0500
    • Re: Betr.: Re: dc schema (36 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 12:48:46 +0000
    • Re: Betr.: Re: dc schema (66 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:08:58 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: Re: dc schema (52 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:20:27 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: Re: dc schema (48 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:10:02 +0000
    • Re: Betr.: Re: dc schema (63 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:34:41 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: Re: dc schema (25 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:19:11 +0000
    • Re: Betr.: Re: dc schema (36 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 15:00:39 +0100
    • Betr.: Re: dc schema (61 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 17:43:10 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: Re: dc schema (99 lines)
      From: Oldroyd, Bill <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 17:24:02 -0000
    • Re: Betr.: Re: dc schema (121 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 09:47:21 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: Re: dc schema (38 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 09:11:36 GMT
    • Re: Betr.: Re: dc schema (34 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 10:56:57 +0100

17. Betr.: Re: dc support (Re: please review 1.1 specs)
    • Betr.: Re: dc support (Re: please review 1.1 specs) (124 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 15:16:54 +0100

18. Betr.: Re: diagnostic 9
    • Betr.: Re: diagnostic 9 (31 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 13:00:10 +0100

19. Betr.: Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri
    • Betr.: Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri (41 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 12:31:58 +0100
    • Betr.: Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri (42 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 12:53:51 +0100
    • Betr.: Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri (82 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 14:14:26 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri (35 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 14:36:21 GMT
    • Re: Betr.: Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri (26 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 09:54:52 -0500
    • Re: Betr.: Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri (47 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 14:41:34 +0000
    • Re: Betr.: Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri (75 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 15:07:47 -0000
    • Re: Betr.: Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri (50 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 16:14:04 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri (48 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 15:47:36 GMT
    • Re: Betr.: Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri (28 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 11:28:03 -0500

20. Betr.: Re: extension namespace (Re: register extra data)
    • Betr.: Re: extension namespace (Re: register extra data) (35 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 13:34:58 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: Re: extension namespace (Re: register extra data) (40 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 12:33:51 +0000

21. Betr.: Re: Fw: NISO Metasearch Inititative: Call for Participation
    • Betr.: Re: Fw: NISO Metasearch Inititative: Call for Participation (26 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 18:12:10 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: Re: Fw: NISO Metasearch Inititative: Call for Participation (41 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 12:20:59 -0500

22. Betr.: Re: namespaces for dc schema
    • Betr.: Re: namespaces for dc schema (101 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 09:48:26 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: Re: namespaces for dc schema (35 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 12:08:31 +0000
    • Re: Betr.: Re: namespaces for dc schema (55 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 07:36:15 -0500
    • Betr.: Re: namespaces for dc schema (45 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 09:26:49 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: Re: namespaces for dc schema (84 lines)
      From: Oldroyd, Bill <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 11:48:00 -0000
    • Re: Betr.: Re: namespaces for dc schema (109 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 11:47:04 +0000
    • Betr.: Re: namespaces for dc schema (32 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:45:35 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: Re: namespaces for dc schema (57 lines)
      From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 12:18:22 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: Re: namespaces for dc schema (41 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 12:30:36 +0100

23. Betr.: Re: negotiation example
    • Betr.: Re: negotiation example (57 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 09:38:31 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: Re: negotiation example (37 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:43:32 GMT
    • Re: Betr.: Re: negotiation example (37 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 15:56:34 +0100

24. Betr.: Re: negotiation ___example___
    • Re: Betr.: Re: negotiation ___example___ (25 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 11:17:05 +0000
    • Re: Betr.: Re: negotiation ___example___ (24 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:05:00 -0500
    • Re: Betr.: Re: negotiation ___example___ (42 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 15:23:53 -0500
    • Re: Betr.: Re: negotiation ___example___ (30 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 20:22:27 +0000
    • Re: Betr.: Re: negotiation ___example___ (15 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 15:57:45 -0500
    • Re: Betr.: Re: negotiation ___example___ (28 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 09:36:12 GMT

25. Betr.: Re: register extra data
    • Betr.: Re: register extra data (25 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 17:12:57 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: Re: register extra data (36 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 16:19:30 -0000
    • Re: Betr.: Re: register extra data (42 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 16:11:49 +0000
    • Re: Betr.: Re: register extra data (48 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 01:01:09 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: Re: register extra data (36 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 01:10:32 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: Re: register extra data (26 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:16:40 GMT
    • Re: Betr.: Re: register extra data (41 lines)
      From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 15:27:11 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: Re: register extra data (29 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:14:58 +0000
    • Re: Betr.: Re: register extra data (29 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 15:20:10 GMT
    • Re: Betr.: Re: register extra data (29 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 15:21:10 GMT

26. Betr.: Re: Scan operation
    • Betr.: Re: Scan operation (85 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:30:43 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: Re: Scan operation (22 lines)
      From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:35:54 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: Re: Scan operation (38 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:46:37 +0000

27. Betr.: Re: SRU rigour
    • Betr.: Re: SRU rigour (43 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 16:55:10 +0100

28. Betr.: Re: unknown "base-parameters"
    • Betr.: Re: unknown "base-parameters" (57 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 14:55:04 +0100
    • Re: Betr.: Re: unknown "base-parameters" (38 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 13:57:23 +0000

29. Betr.: Revised Scan text
    • Betr.: Revised Scan text (27 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 18:23:58 +0100

30. Betr.: SRU diagnostics
    • Betr.: SRU diagnostics (43 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 17:27:10 +0100

31. Changes
    • Changes (72 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 12:19:55 +0000
    • Re: Changes (36 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 14:51:47 GMT
    • Re: Changes (41 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 14:50:52 +0000
    • Re: Changes (99 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 14:19:41 -0500
    • Re: Changes (112 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 23:26:52 +0000
    • Re: Changes (20 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 23:44:15 +0000
    • Re: Changes (25 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 23:54:45 +0000
    • Re: Changes (21 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2004 23:30:33 -0000
    • Re: Changes (69 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 11:24:31 -0500
    • Re: Changes (120 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 12:33:14 +0000
    • Re: Changes (38 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 12:41:45 +0000
    • Re: Changes (97 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 14:27:58 -0500

32. character unit
    • character unit (15 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:41:42 -0500
    • Re: character unit (29 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:52:52 -0500
    • Re: character unit (36 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 17:31:06 GMT
    • Re: character unit (33 lines)
      From: Edward C. Zimmermann <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 23:29:51 +0100
    • Re: character unit (33 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:27:17 +0000
    • Re: character unit (29 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 12:44:42 GMT

33. context set ids
    • context set ids (36 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 16:28:40 -0500
    • Re: context set ids (39 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 09:39:53 GMT
    • Re: context set ids (25 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 11:41:34 +0000
    • Re: context set ids (80 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 10:02:42 -0500

34. Contribution on ZING Extension
    • Re: Contribution on ZING Extension (75 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 10:12:05 -0500
    • Re: Contribution on ZING Extension (65 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:50:01 -0500

35. Database URL in EchoedRequests
    • Database URL in EchoedRequests (33 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 13:02:17 -0500
    • Re: Database URL in EchoedRequests (61 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 21:49:21 -0000
    • Re: Database URL in EchoedRequests (23 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 23:11:21 -0500
    • Re: Database URL in EchoedRequests (47 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 09:47:14 -0000
    • Re: Database URL in EchoedRequests (32 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 11:19:38 +0000

36. Database/resource/whatever unavailable.
    • Database/resource/whatever unavailable. (20 lines)
      From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 00:29:00 +0100

37. DC (etc) schema namespace
    • DC (etc) schema namespace (31 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 13:31:01 +0000
    • Re: DC (etc) schema namespace (209 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 17:14:50 -0500

38. dc collection
    • dc collection (33 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 18:02:26 -0500
    • Re: dc collection (42 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 18:51:45 -0500
    • Re: dc collection (66 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 23:55:39 +0000
    • Re: dc collection (25 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 10:40:34 GMT
    • Re: dc collection (41 lines)
      From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 12:28:24 +0100
    • Re: dc collection (46 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 09:47:56 -0500
    • Re: dc collection (63 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 15:14:49 +0000
    • Re: dc collection (23 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 10:47:45 -0500
    • Re: dc collection (41 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 16:58:07 GMT

39. dc schema
    • dc schema (15 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 10:59:44 -0500
    • Re: dc schema (36 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 11:15:28 -0500
    • Re: dc schema (33 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 11:40:05 -0500
    • Re: dc schema (56 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 11:42:13 -0500
    • Re: dc schema (28 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 16:40:55 +0000
    • Re: dc schema (28 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 14:02:38 -0500
    • Re: dc schema (41 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 02:17:21 +0100
    • Re: dc schema (56 lines)
      From: Oldroyd, Bill <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:00:17 -0000
    • Re: dc schema (32 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:47:00 +0000
    • Re: dc schema (50 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 07:21:16 -0500
    • Re: dc schema (24 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 09:54:53 -0500
    • Re: dc schema (17 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 12:49:14 -0500
    • Re: dc schema (43 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:00:05 -0500
    • Re: dc schema (24 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:05:59 -0500
    • Re: dc schema (43 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:18:34 -0500
    • Re: dc schema (34 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 18:12:18 +0000
    • Re: dc schema (22 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:28:03 -0500
    • Re: dc schema (41 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 18:20:15 +0000
    • Re: dc schema (27 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 19:00:13 +0000
    • Re: dc schema (25 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 16:23:47 -0500
    • Re: dc schema (22 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 16:30:28 -0500
    • Re: dc schema (28 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:36:03 +0000
    • Re: dc schema (80 lines)
      From: Sebastian Hammer <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 23:32:40 +0100
    • Re: dc schema (22 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 17:41:36 -0500
    • Re: dc schema (35 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 18:02:12 -0500
    • Re: dc schema (28 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 00:34:45 +0000
    • Re: dc schema (37 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 02:40:27 +0100
    • Re: dc schema (40 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 10:29:58 +0000

40. dc support (Re: please review 1.1 specs)
    • dc support (Re: please review 1.1 specs) (23 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 19:10:46 -0500
    • Re: dc support (Re: please review 1.1 specs) (34 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 00:29:53 +0000
    • Re: dc support (Re: please review 1.1 specs) (44 lines)
      From: Eliot Christian <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 09:15:55 -0500
    • Re: dc support (Re: please review 1.1 specs) (63 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 10:45:18 -0500
    • Re: dc support (Re: please review 1.1 specs) (32 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 15:43:22 +0000
    • Re: dc support (Re: please review 1.1 specs) (22 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 11:11:35 -0500
    • Re: dc support (Re: please review 1.1 specs) (47 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 16:47:10 GMT
    • Re: dc support (Re: please review 1.1 specs) (20 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 11:58:06 -0500
    • Re: dc support (Re: please review 1.1 specs) (31 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 22:56:06 GMT
    • Re: dc support (Re: please review 1.1 specs) (111 lines)
      From: Eliot Christian <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 08:27:41 -0500
    • Re: dc support (Re: please review 1.1 specs) (31 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 12:36:58 GMT
    • Re: dc support (Re: please review 1.1 specs) (93 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 12:50:24 +0000
    • Re: dc support (Re: please review 1.1 specs) (56 lines)
      From: Sebastian Hammer <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 14:21:58 +0100
    • Re: dc support (Re: please review 1.1 specs) (94 lines)
      From: Eliot Christian <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 08:49:50 -0500
    • Re: dc support (Re: please review 1.1 specs) (44 lines)
      From: Eliot Christian <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 08:35:14 -0500
    • Re: dc support (Re: please review 1.1 specs) (37 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 14:12:22 GMT
    • Re: dc support (Re: please review 1.1 specs) (58 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 13:57:18 +0000
    • Re: dc support (Re: please review 1.1 specs) (48 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 14:00:40 +0000
    • Re: dc support (Re: please review 1.1 specs) (47 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 14:47:47 GMT
    • Re: dc support (Re: please review 1.1 specs) (104 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 09:48:15 -0500
    • Re: dc support (Re: please review 1.1 specs) (25 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 17:28:08 GMT

41. diagnostic (RE: dc schema)
    • diagnostic (RE: dc schema) (38 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 20:04:53 -0500

42. Diagnostic 8.
    • Diagnostic 8. (14 lines)
      From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 23:42:41 +0100

43. Diagnostic 8. And 9
    • Re: Diagnostic 8. And 9 (29 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 11:42:40 +0000
    • Re: Diagnostic 8. And 9 (46 lines)
      From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 15:48:03 +0100
    • Re: Diagnostic 8. And 9 (25 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 11:31:17 -0500
    • Re: Diagnostic 8. And 9 (48 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 16:51:01 GMT
    • Re: Diagnostic 8. And 9 (15 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 11:54:59 -0500
    • Re: Diagnostic 8. And 9 (37 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 17:15:24 -0000
    • Re: Diagnostic 8. And 9 (41 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 17:18:20 -0000
    • Re: Diagnostic 8. And 9 (46 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 17:19:34 +0000
    • Re: Diagnostic 8. And 9 (34 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 17:22:43 +0000
    • Re: Diagnostic 8. And 9 (75 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 13:16:33 -0500
    • Re: Diagnostic 8. And 9 (46 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 14:11:33 -0500
    • Re: Diagnostic 8. And 9 (40 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 19:13:42 -0000
    • Re: Diagnostic 8. And 9 (69 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 19:15:15 -0000
    • Re: Diagnostic 8. And 9 (40 lines)
      From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 20:24:40 +0100
    • Re: Diagnostic 8. And 9 (21 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 14:48:29 -0500
    • Re: Diagnostic 8. And 9 (38 lines)
      From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 20:58:13 +0100
    • Re: Diagnostic 8. And 9 (21 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 15:28:29 -0500
    • Re: Diagnostic 8. And 9 (32 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 23:19:11 +0100
    • Re: Diagnostic 8. And 9 (22 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 17:38:52 -0500
    • Re: Diagnostic 8. And 9 (52 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 22:48:18 -0000
    • Re: Diagnostic 8. And 9 (39 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 23:02:49 GMT
    • Re: Diagnostic 8. And 9 (20 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 18:17:00 -0500

44. diagnostic 9
    • diagnostic 9 (15 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 17:51:46 +0100
    • Re: diagnostic 9 (30 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 13:53:30 -0500
    • Re: diagnostic 9 (31 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 19:35:45 +0000
    • Re: diagnostic 9 (27 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 15:07:43 -0500
    • Re: diagnostic 9 (41 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 22:14:19 +0100
    • Re: diagnostic 9 (34 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 11:13:30 +0000
    • Re: diagnostic 9 (29 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 11:25:07 +0000
    • Re: diagnostic 9 (22 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 11:47:45 +0000
    • Re: diagnostic 9 (55 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 13:03:26 GMT

45. diagnostic code type (Re: Betr.: Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri)
    • diagnostic code type (Re: Betr.: Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri) (17 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 14:06:54 -0500
    • Re: diagnostic code type (Re: Betr.: Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri) (30 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 14:44:37 -0500
    • Re: diagnostic code type (Re: Betr.: Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri) (53 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 21:49:29 -0000

46. Diagnostic Codes
    • Diagnostic Codes (14 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 13:40:31 -0500
    • Re: Diagnostic Codes (34 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 20:59:24 +0000
    • Re: Diagnostic Codes (46 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 18:39:29 -0500

47. diagnostic namespace vs. uri
    • diagnostic namespace vs. uri (36 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 18:46:44 -0500
    • Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri (53 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 21:22:13 -0500
    • Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri (72 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 21:27:48 -0500
    • Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri (180 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 10:22:47 -0000
    • Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri (28 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 02:12:29 +0100
    • Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri (26 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 02:24:20 +0100
    • Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri (43 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 01:40:38 -0000
    • Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri (20 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 08:21:50 -0500
    • Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri (30 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 08:27:56 -0500
    • Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri (65 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 15:12:05 -0000
    • Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri (31 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 10:41:17 -0500
    • Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri (38 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 18:50:34 +0100
    • Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri (38 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 13:31:48 -0500
    • Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri (21 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 13:47:22 -0500
    • Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri (75 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 19:56:26 +0100
    • Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri (49 lines)
      From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 23:56:25 +0100
    • Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri (31 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 11:23:28 GMT
    • Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri (77 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 12:17:16 GMT
    • Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri (66 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 12:25:24 +0000
    • Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri (21 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 09:03:31 -0500
    • Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri (38 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 14:08:06 +0000

48. diagnostic object (Re: Betr.: Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri)
    • diagnostic object (Re: Betr.: Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri) (25 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 10:10:02 -0500
    • Re: diagnostic object (Re: Betr.: Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri) (29 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 15:29:44 +0000
    • Re: diagnostic object (Re: Betr.: Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri) (62 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 16:18:55 GMT
    • Re: diagnostic object (Re: Betr.: Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri) (49 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 17:31:49 +0000
    • Re: diagnostic object (Re: Betr.: Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri) (85 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 09:20:38 GMT

49. diagnostic.html
    • diagnostic.html (15 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 16:04:51 -0500

50. Diagnostics URI
    • Diagnostics URI (58 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 15:40:59 +0000
    • Re: Diagnostics URI (49 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 16:59:28 GMT
    • Re: Diagnostics URI (82 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 17:11:55 -0500
    • Re: Diagnostics URI (27 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 22:37:47 +0000
    • Re: Diagnostics URI (35 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 12:51:19 GMT
    • Re: Diagnostics URI (19 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 07:59:14 -0500

51. Done? (Re: Extensions (Re: diagnostic (RE: dc schema)))
    • Done? (Re: Extensions (Re: diagnostic (RE: dc schema))) (27 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 12:58:22 -0500
    • Re: Done? (Re: Extensions (Re: diagnostic (RE: dc schema))) (41 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 19:40:29 +0000
    • Re: Done? (Re: Extensions (Re: diagnostic (RE: dc schema))) (26 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 15:26:02 -0500
    • Re: Done? (Re: Extensions (Re: diagnostic (RE: dc schema))) (43 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 15:32:46 -0500
    • Re: Done? (Re: Extensions (Re: diagnostic (RE: dc schema))) (24 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 22:19:53 +0100
    • Re: Done? (Re: Extensions (Re: diagnostic (RE: dc schema))) (26 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 11:14:10 +0000

52. EchoedRequest
    • EchoedRequest (21 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 18:18:57 +0000
    • Re: EchoedRequest (35 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 19:23:57 -0000
    • Re: EchoedRequest (31 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2004 00:44:42 +0100

53. explain schema uri
    • explain schema uri (15 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 17:10:14 -0500
    • Re: explain schema uri (27 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 23:04:23 +0000

54. extension namespace (Re: register extra data)
    • extension namespace (Re: register extra data) (79 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 16:37:27 -0500
    • Re: extension namespace (Re: register extra data) (86 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 23:15:31 +0100
    • Re: extension namespace (Re: register extra data) (99 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 17:35:07 -0500
    • Re: extension namespace (Re: register extra data) (75 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 09:11:45 GMT
    • Re: extension namespace (Re: register extra data) (44 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 11:02:42 +0000
    • Re: extension namespace (Re: register extra data) (31 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 12:17:04 GMT
    • Re: extension namespace (Re: register extra data) (35 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 12:19:19 +0000
    • Re: extension namespace (Re: register extra data) (37 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 14:25:27 GMT

55. extension or extension-space
    • extension or extension-space (71 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 10:13:10 -0500
    • Re: extension or extension-space (112 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 15:59:53 GMT
    • Re: extension or extension-space (46 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 15:46:37 +0000

56. Extensions (Re: diagnostic (RE: dc schema))
    • Extensions (Re: diagnostic (RE: dc schema)) (30 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 11:23:41 +0000
    • Re: Extensions (Re: diagnostic (RE: dc schema)) (21 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 07:21:05 -0500
    • Re: Extensions (Re: diagnostic (RE: dc schema)) (25 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 12:27:06 +0000
    • Re: Extensions (Re: diagnostic (RE: dc schema)) (20 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 09:37:28 -0500
    • Re: Extensions (Re: diagnostic (RE: dc schema)) (31 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 15:50:40 GMT
    • Re: Extensions (Re: diagnostic (RE: dc schema)) (32 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 16:34:24 +0000

57. extra-data-example.html typo
    • extra-data-example.html typo (25 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 12:43:36 +0000

58. FAQ
    • FAQ (51 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 17:05:26 GMT
    • Re: FAQ (24 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 17:21:59 +0000

59. faq (Re: xpath results (Re: namespaces for dc schema))
    • faq (Re: xpath results (Re: namespaces for dc schema)) (49 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 10:43:55 -0500
    • Re: faq (Re: xpath results (Re: namespaces for dc schema)) (68 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:43:53 +0000

60. First and Last Terms in Index
    • First and Last Terms in Index (39 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 09:28:07 -0500
    • Re: First and Last Terms in Index (41 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:33:14 +0000

61. Fw: Contribution on ZING Extension
    • Fw: Contribution on ZING Extension (525 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 09:48:49 -0500
    • Re: Fw: Contribution on ZING Extension (49 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 15:15:14 +0000
    • Re: Fw: Contribution on ZING Extension (45 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 23:22:03 GMT
    • Re: Fw: Contribution on ZING Extension (34 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 23:41:33 -0000
    • Re: Fw: Contribution on ZING Extension (42 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 23:33:01 +0000
    • Re: Fw: Contribution on ZING Extension (48 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 09:53:45 GMT
    • Re: Fw: Contribution on ZING Extension (27 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 09:13:00 -0500
    • Re: Fw: Contribution on ZING Extension (61 lines)
      From: Oldroyd, Bill <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 15:36:44 -0000
    • Re: Fw: Contribution on ZING Extension (36 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 15:47:47 GMT
    • Re: Fw: Contribution on ZING Extension (28 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 15:36:25 +0000
    • Re: Fw: Contribution on ZING Extension (63 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 15:56:56 -0000

62. Fw: infoURI register
    • Fw: infoURI register (81 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 16:51:43 -0500

63. Fw: NISO Metasearch Inititative: Call for Participation
    • Fw: NISO Metasearch Inititative: Call for Participation (84 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 09:52:33 -0500
    • Re: Fw: NISO Metasearch Inititative: Call for Participation (36 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 15:02:23 +0000
    • Re: Fw: NISO Metasearch Inititative: Call for Participation (19 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 10:29:03 -0500
    • Re: Fw: NISO Metasearch Inititative: Call for Participation (28 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 10:30:53 -0500
    • Re: Fw: NISO Metasearch Inititative: Call for Participation (42 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 15:36:20 +0000
    • Re: Fw: NISO Metasearch Inititative: Call for Participation (52 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 16:24:43 -0000
    • Re: Fw: NISO Metasearch Inititative: Call for Participation (20 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 11:29:09 -0500
    • Re: Fw: NISO Metasearch Inititative: Call for Participation (37 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 17:00:30 -0000
    • Re: Fw: NISO Metasearch Inititative: Call for Participation (53 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 17:02:26 -0000
    • Re: Fw: NISO Metasearch Inititative: Call for Participation (36 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 17:03:28 +0000

64. Help with SRW response
    • Help with SRW response (83 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 15:49:22 -0500
    • Re: Help with SRW response (39 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 11:21:42 +0000
    • Re: Help with SRW response (50 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 13:05:53 GMT
    • Re: Help with SRW response (74 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 13:10:41 -0000
    • Re: Help with SRW response (63 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 13:14:37 +0000
    • Re: Help with SRW response (29 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 08:58:19 -0500
    • Re: Help with SRW response (29 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 15:01:53 GMT
    • Re: Help with SRW response (26 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 10:09:32 -0500
    • Re: Help with SRW response (34 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 15:34:11 +0000
    • Re: Help with SRW response (53 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 19:25:59 -0000
    • Re: Help with SRW response (41 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 19:45:51 -0000
    • Re: Help with SRW response (19 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 15:00:46 -0500
    • Re: Help with SRW response (30 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 23:28:08 +0000
    • Re: Help with SRW response (28 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 23:30:05 +0000
    • Re: Help with SRW response (36 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2004 00:58:02 +0100
    • Re: Help with SRW response (52 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2004 22:37:49 -0000
    • Re: Help with SRW response (48 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2004 22:39:17 -0000
    • Re: Help with SRW response (23 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 14:45:52 -0500

65. idle time (Re: please review 1.1 specs)
    • idle time (Re: please review 1.1 specs) (28 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 13:59:23 -0500

66. info URIs
    • Re: info URIs (39 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 12:02:16 +0000
    • Re: info URIs (41 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 09:23:58 -0500
    • Re: info URIs (58 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 14:31:34 +0000
    • Re: info URIs (32 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 10:03:46 -0500
    • Re: info URIs (52 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 15:28:14 +0000
    • Re: info URIs (32 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 11:36:54 -0500
    • Re: info URIs (49 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 12:18:33 -0500
    • Re: info URIs (32 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 15:40:17 -0500
    • Re: info URIs (51 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 15:59:14 -0500
    • Re: info URIs (25 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 09:04:56 +0000
    • Re: info URIs (48 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 10:50:55 GMT
    • Re: info URIs (42 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 11:35:46 +0000

67. Info URIs
    • Info URIs (12 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 15:28:53 +0000

68. linking (was: Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs)
    • linking (was: Re: Betr.: please review 1.1 specs) (95 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 17:11:03 -0500

69. Metasearch
    • Metasearch (25 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 15:55:04 -0500

70. MIKE SPEAKS on XPath and Validation :-)
    • MIKE SPEAKS on XPath and Validation :-) (96 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 13:09:06 GMT
    • Re: MIKE SPEAKS on XPath and Validation :-) (71 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 13:36:04 +0000
    • Re: MIKE SPEAKS on XPath and Validation :-) (15 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 09:50:06 -0500

71. Minor correction in XCQL example
    • Minor correction in XCQL example (49 lines)
      From: Oldroyd, Bill <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 13:00:03 -0000
    • Re: Minor correction in XCQL example (33 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 12:57:27 +0000
    • Re: Minor correction in XCQL example (24 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:13:09 -0500
    • Re: Minor correction in XCQL example (60 lines)
      From: Oldroyd, Bill <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 16:16:05 -0000
    • Re: Minor correction in XCQL example (20 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 11:47:13 -0500

72. Missing EchoedScanRequest elements?
    • Missing EchoedScanRequest elements? (19 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 10:32:26 -0500
    • Re: Missing EchoedScanRequest elements? (29 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 15:31:15 +0000
    • Re: Missing EchoedScanRequest elements? (43 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 11:11:31 -0500

73. namespace identifiers
    • namespace identifiers (76 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 17:35:52 -0500
    • Re: namespace identifiers (31 lines)
      From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 00:47:58 +0100
    • Re: namespace identifiers (36 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 23:49:33 GMT
    • Re: namespace identifiers (40 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 19:02:15 -0500
    • Re: namespace identifiers (82 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 00:16:10 -0000
    • Re: namespace identifiers (22 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 01:42:27 +0100
    • Re: namespace identifiers (30 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 12:32:53 GMT
    • Re: namespace identifiers (35 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 12:35:54 +0000

74. namespaces for dc schema
    • namespaces for dc schema (27 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 10:26:01 -0500
    • Re: namespaces for dc schema (23 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 10:30:50 -0500
    • Re: namespaces for dc schema (28 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 15:33:37 +0000
    • Re: namespaces for dc schema (39 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 01:41:44 +0100
    • Re: namespaces for dc schema (70 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 20:03:17 -0500
    • Re: namespaces for dc schema (32 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 23:04:31 GMT
    • Re: namespaces for dc schema (33 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 10:19:48 -0500
    • Re: namespaces for dc schema (33 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 15:28:57 +0000
    • Re: namespaces for dc schema (37 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 15:57:29 GMT
    • Re: namespaces for dc schema (43 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 16:10:44 +0000
    • Re: namespaces for dc schema (24 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 11:57:43 -0500
    • Re: namespaces for dc schema (38 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 17:00:57 GMT
    • Re: namespaces for dc schema (41 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 17:02:52 +0000
    • Re: namespaces for dc schema (70 lines)
      From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:57:45 +0100
    • Re: namespaces for dc schema (40 lines)
      From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:59:04 +0100
    • Re: namespaces for dc schema (28 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 22:31:41 +0000
    • Re: namespaces for dc schema (46 lines)
      From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 10:02:00 +0100

75. Namespacing diagnostics (Re: Diagnostic 8. And 9)
    • Namespacing diagnostics (Re: Diagnostic 8. And 9) (30 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 18:13:05 -0500
    • Re: Namespacing diagnostics (Re: Diagnostic 8. And 9) (28 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 23:50:52 GMT

76. negotiation example
    • Re: negotiation example (41 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 19:38:52 +0000
    • Re: negotiation example (31 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 17:42:35 -0500
    • Re: negotiation example (27 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 09:26:36 +0000
    • Re: negotiation example (31 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 11:09:58 GMT
    • Re: negotiation example (35 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 18:30:38 -0500
    • Re: negotiation example (39 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 00:27:39 +0000
    • Re: negotiation example (26 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:27:17 GMT
    • Re: negotiation example (20 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:33:13 -0500
    • Re: negotiation example (32 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 15:29:20 -0500
    • Re: negotiation example (41 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 09:29:35 GMT

77. New FAQ Entry.
    • New FAQ Entry. (32 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 16:47:10 +0000

78. new home pate
    • new home pate (15 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 17:07:15 -0500
    • Re: new home pate (27 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 00:33:54 +0000
    • Re: new home pate (40 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 08:14:44 -0000
    • RE: new home pate (26 lines)
      From: Janifer Gatenby <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 10:43:48 +0100
    • Re: new home pate (43 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 11:19:34 -0500
    • Re: new home pate (35 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 16:24:31 +0000
    • Re: new home pate (31 lines)
      From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 17:56:16 +0100
    • Re: new home pate (40 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 16:56:00 +0000

79. New proposed standard - SSRW
    • New proposed standard - SSRW (31 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 12:36:45 -0000
    • Re: New proposed standard - SSRW (45 lines)
      From: Sebastian Hammer <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 14:24:58 +0100
    • Re: New proposed standard - SSRW (19 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 10:08:40 -0500

80. No such operation "searchRetrieveRequest"
    • No such operation "searchRetrieveRequest" (31 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 13:44:43 -0500

81. Numeric types
    • Numeric types (18 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 16:56:57 -0000
    • Re: Numeric types (48 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 17:05:55 +0000

82. please review 1.1 specs
    • please review 1.1 specs (29 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 16:52:23 -0500
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs (52 lines)
      From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 00:37:02 +0100
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs (62 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 12:36:19 +0000
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs (103 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 15:39:54 -0000
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs (32 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 16:33:56 +0000
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs (24 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 17:00:30 -0000
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs (18 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 17:02:12 -0000
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs (51 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 17:39:17 +0000
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs (85 lines)
      From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 19:46:23 +0100
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs (17 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 22:44:25 -0000
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs (32 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 10:30:35 -0000
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs (30 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 13:25:55 GMT
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs (125 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 08:51:14 -0500
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs (33 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 14:30:18 +0000
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs (28 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 10:13:42 -0500
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs (48 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 15:12:35 +0000
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs (63 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 10:39:11 -0500
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs (52 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 16:37:43 GMT
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs (20 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 12:39:17 -0500
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs (83 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 13:37:20 -0500
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs (44 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 18:45:39 +0000
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs (85 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 16:00:24 -0500
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs (21 lines)
      From: Eliot Christian <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 18:12:31 -0500
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs (329 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 11:37:48 +0000
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs (129 lines)
      From: Janifer Gatenby <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 13:06:40 +0100
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs (194 lines)
      From: Janifer Gatenby <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 13:12:54 +0100
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs (69 lines)
      From: Janifer Gatenby <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 13:28:32 +0100
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs (306 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 12:34:39 +0000
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs (32 lines)
      From: Janifer Gatenby <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:04:55 +0100
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs (28 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:19:46 GMT
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs (39 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:28:52 GMT
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs (71 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 09:53:41 -0500

83. please review 1.1 specs [diagnostics]
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs [diagnostics] (27 lines)
      From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 11:12:32 +0100
    • Re: please review 1.1 specs [diagnostics] (15 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 17:21:54 -0500

84. profile ids (Re: please review 1.1 specs)
    • profile ids (Re: please review 1.1 specs) (56 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 18:41:41 -0500
    • Re: profile ids (Re: please review 1.1 specs) (31 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 00:23:06 +0000
    • Re: profile ids (Re: please review 1.1 specs) (33 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:25:43 GMT
    • Re: profile ids (Re: please review 1.1 specs) (31 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 18:22:59 +0000
    • Re: profile ids (Re: please review 1.1 specs) (29 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:54:18 -0500
    • Re: profile ids (Re: please review 1.1 specs) (52 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 20:11:18 +0000

85. profiles and extensions (Re: register extra data)
    • profiles and extensions (Re: register extra data) (22 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 19:04:20 -0500
    • Re: profiles and extensions (Re: register extra data) (45 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:40:59 GMT

86. Quote of the Day
    • Re: Quote of the Day (15 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:34:44 -0500
    • Re: Quote of the Day (41 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 09:34:32 GMT
    • Re: Quote of the Day (53 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 12:19:39 +0000
    • Re: Quote of the Day (55 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 13:00:58 GMT

87. Quote of the Day (Was: new home pate)
    • Quote of the Day (Was: new home pate) (34 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:23:06 GMT

88. register extra data
    • register extra data (23 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 16:48:27 +0100
    • Re: register extra data (34 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 15:44:37 +0000
    • Re: register extra data (28 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 16:02:14 -0000
    • Re: register extra data (27 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 15:49:48 +0000
    • Re: register extra data (40 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 17:08:51 GMT
    • Re: register extra data (23 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 00:34:48 +0100
    • Re: register extra data (32 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 17:54:15 -0500
    • Re: register extra data (59 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 23:17:41 GMT
    • Re: register extra data (59 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 00:54:07 +0100
    • Re: register extra data (32 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 18:58:39 -0500
    • Re: register extra data (38 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 01:39:04 +0100
    • Re: register extra data (76 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 12:28:58 GMT
    • Re: register extra data (43 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 12:30:48 GMT
    • Re: register extra data (58 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 12:35:07 +0000
    • Re: register extra data (48 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 13:27:45 GMT
    • Re: register extra data (37 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 10:25:19 -0500
    • Re: register extra data (27 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 16:30:07 +0000

89. Release date
    • Release date (13 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 10:19:51 -0000
    • Re: Release date (30 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 17:11:29 -0500
    • Re: Release date (17 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 22:19:02 +0000

90. release date (Re: Betr.: Re: negotiation ___example___)
    • release date (Re: Betr.: Re: negotiation ___example___) (15 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 09:54:20 -0500
    • Re: release date (Re: Betr.: Re: negotiation ___example___) (27 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 15:20:42 GMT

91. Required elements for scan termType.
    • Required elements for scan termType. (22 lines)
      From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:17:50 +0100
    • Re: Required elements for scan termType. (27 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:20:25 +0000
    • Re: Required elements for scan termType. (27 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:21:28 +0000
    • Re: Required elements for scan termType. (38 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:38:04 -0000

92. requirements and expectations
    • Re: requirements and expectations (29 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 17:21:30 -0500
    • Re: requirements and expectations (47 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 09:13:48 -0000
    • Re: requirements and expectations (29 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 09:30:14 +0000
    • Re: requirements and expectations (40 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 09:32:49 +0000
    • Re: requirements and expectations (32 lines)
      From: Sebastian Hammer <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 10:58:44 +0100

93. result set semantics (was: Re: WSDL)
    • result set semantics (was: Re: WSDL) (37 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 17:11:50 -0500
    • Re: result set semantics (was: Re: WSDL) (84 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 09:20:30 +0000
    • Re: result set semantics (was: Re: WSDL) (30 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 09:29:07 +0000
    • Re: result set semantics (was: Re: WSDL) (29 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 16:06:30 GMT
    • Re: result set semantics (was: Re: WSDL) (22 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 15:03:34 -0500
    • Re: result set semantics (was: Re: WSDL) (38 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 20:09:06 +0000
    • Re: result set semantics (was: Re: WSDL) (49 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 15:56:01 -0500

94. review of 1.1
    • review of 1.1 (26 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 17:36:13 -0500
    • Re: review of 1.1 (68 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:17:29 -0000
    • Re: review of 1.1 (78 lines)
      From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 10:56:53 -0500

95. Revised Scan text
    • Revised Scan text (159 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 16:52:42 +0000
    • Re: Revised Scan text (39 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 13:19:49 -0500
    • Re: Revised Scan text (26 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 18:26:23 +0000
    • Re: Revised Scan text (38 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 14:47:26 -0500
    • Re: Revised Scan text (94 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 17:28:00 GMT
    • Re: Revised Scan text (31 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 13:17:20 -0500
    • Re: Revised Scan text (681 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2004 12:04:35 +0000
    • Re: Revised Scan text (25 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2004 13:28:35 GMT

96. Scan operation
    • Scan operation (79 lines)
      From: Oldroyd, Bill <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 12:57:38 -0000
    • Re: Scan operation (66 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:05:18 +0000

97. scan operation
    • scan operation (31 lines)
      From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 15:16:52 +0100

98. Scan operation
    • Re: Scan operation (42 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 13:38:42 GMT
    • Re: Scan operation (35 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 13:37:20 +0000
    • Re: Scan operation (56 lines)
      From: Janifer Gatenby <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 14:54:42 +0100
    • Re: Scan operation (39 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 10:29:16 -0500
    • Re: Scan operation (38 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 15:49:01 GMT
    • Re: Scan operation (47 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 15:40:42 +0000
    • Re: Scan operation (21 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 11:08:34 -0500
    • Re: Scan operation (35 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 16:24:40 +0000
    • Re: Scan operation (47 lines)
      From: Janifer Gatenby <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 09:39:25 +0100
    • Re: Scan operation (32 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 09:05:20 GMT
    • Re: Scan operation (46 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 11:39:24 +0000
    • Re: Scan operation (35 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 13:07:11 GMT
    • Re: Scan operation (39 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 13:19:48 +0000
    • Re: Scan operation (19 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 08:44:00 -0500
    • Re: Scan operation (21 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 08:49:43 -0500
    • Re: Scan operation (82 lines)
      From: Oldroyd, Bill <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 13:59:02 -0000
    • Re: Scan operation (33 lines)
      From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 09:11:14 -0500
    • Re: Scan operation (34 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 14:26:01 GMT
    • Re: Scan operation (62 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 14:18:59 +0000
    • Re: Scan operation (59 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 15:08:39 GMT
    • Re: Scan operation (41 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 15:19:56 +0000
    • Re: Scan operation (51 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 16:03:46 GMT
    • Re: Scan operation (80 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 16:17:59 +0000
    • Re: Scan operation (31 lines)
      From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 16:46:19 GMT

99. Schema
    • Schema (33 lines)
      From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 11:30:06 +0000
    • Re: Schema (54 lines)
      From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 12:24:08 -0000

100. schema info ids
     • schema info ids (21 lines)
       From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 15:18:32 -0500

101. SRU diagnostics
     • SRU diagnostics (32 lines)
       From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 15:43:24 +0000
     • Re: SRU diagnostics (22 lines)
       From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 11:20:18 -0500
     • Re: SRU diagnostics (25 lines)
       From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 16:44:44 GMT

102. SRU examples
     • Re: SRU examples (84 lines)
       From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2004 22:39:28 -0500
     • Re: SRU examples (25 lines)
       From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 19:40:23 +0000
     • Re: SRU examples (38 lines)
       From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 19:43:56 +0000
     • Re: SRU examples (52 lines)
       From: Janifer Gatenby <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2004 16:17:58 +0100
     • Re: SRU examples (105 lines)
       From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 15:20:02 -0000
     • Re: SRU examples (14 lines)
       From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 17:53:15 -0500
     • Re: SRU examples (28 lines)
       From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 09:34:08 GMT

103. SRU rigour
     • SRU rigour (41 lines)
       From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 10:56:55 +0000
     • Re: SRU rigour (31 lines)
       From: Eliot Christian <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 06:50:54 -0500
     • Re: SRU rigour (53 lines)
       From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 12:02:55 +0000
     • Re: SRU rigour (21 lines)
       From: LeVan,Ralph <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 09:41:05 -0500
     • Re: SRU rigour (31 lines)
       From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 14:59:36 +0000
     • Re: SRU rigour (52 lines)
       From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 16:42:52 GMT

104. SRU XML response
     • SRU XML response (47 lines)
       From: Oldroyd, Bill <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 12:37:21 -0000
     • Re: SRU XML response (37 lines)
       From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 12:43:24 +0000
     • Re: SRU XML response (87 lines)
       From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 14:32:55 -0000

105. SRW Implementors page
     • SRW Implementors page (18 lines)
       From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 12:03:08 -0500
     • Re: SRW Implementors page (43 lines)
       From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 12:12:16 +0000
     • Re: SRW Implementors page (59 lines)
       From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 10:14:33 -0500

106. SRW Service - WSDL question
     • Re: SRW Service - WSDL question (47 lines)
       From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 12:27:20 +0000
     • Re: SRW Service - WSDL question (42 lines)
       From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 12:56:31 -0000
     • Re: SRW Service - WSDL question (56 lines)
       From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 12:59:25 -0000
     • Re: SRW Service - WSDL question (67 lines)
       From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 14:25:38 -0000
     • Re: SRW Service - WSDL question (28 lines)
       From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 15:13:09 +0000

107. SRW/SRU/Z39.50 server for testing.
     • SRW/SRU/Z39.50 server for testing. (27 lines)
       From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 15:27:46 +0100

108. surely (Re: diagnostic object (Re: Betr.: Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri))
     • surely (Re: diagnostic object (Re: Betr.: Re: diagnostic namespace vs. uri)) (36 lines)
       From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 10:56:54 -0500

109. ToDo List + corrections
     • ToDo List + corrections (780 lines)
       From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 16:33:06 +0000
     • Re: ToDo List + corrections (84 lines)
       From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 22:44:29 -0000

110. unknown "base-parameters"
     • Re: unknown "base-parameters" (96 lines)
       From: Oldroyd, Bill <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 11:06:15 -0000
     • Re: unknown "base-parameters" (25 lines)
       From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 19:44:45 +0000
     • Re: unknown "base-parameters" (30 lines)
       From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 09:37:53 GMT
     • Re: unknown "base-parameters" (39 lines)
       From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 10:16:46 GMT
     • Re: unknown "base-parameters" (38 lines)
       From: Eliot Christian <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 05:37:05 -0500
     • Re: unknown "base-parameters" (81 lines)
       From: Oldroyd, Bill <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 11:49:15 -0000
     • Re: unknown "base-parameters" (36 lines)
       From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 12:11:53 -0000
     • Re: unknown "base-parameters" (35 lines)
       From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 12:01:28 +0000
     • Re: unknown "base-parameters" (39 lines)
       From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 16:37:36 GMT
     • Re: unknown "base-parameters" (34 lines)
       From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 16:39:14 GMT

111. URIs and URLs
     • URIs and URLs (31 lines)
       From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 17:24:25 -0000
     • Re: URIs and URLs (17 lines)
       From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 13:44:06 -0500

112. version page
     • version page (19 lines)
       From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 16:25:58 -0500

113. version parameter
     • Re: version parameter (27 lines)
       From: Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 10:17:48 GMT

114. WSDL Draft 3
     • WSDL Draft 3 (567 lines)
       From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 21:22:01 -0000

115. XPath and Validation
     • Re: XPath and Validation (36 lines)
       From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 11:16:23 +0000
     • Re: XPath and Validation (88 lines)
       From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 12:48:39 +0100
     • Re: XPath and Validation (62 lines)
       From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 12:00:13 +0000
     • Re: XPath and Validation (112 lines)
       From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 13:44:55 +0100
     • Re: XPath and Validation (54 lines)
       From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 12:55:43 +0000
     • Re: XPath and Validation (97 lines)
       From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 15:22:13 +0100
     • Re: XPath and Validation (72 lines)
       From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 14:46:11 +0000
     • Re: XPath and Validation (144 lines)
       From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 17:17:39 +0100
     • Re: XPath and Validation (85 lines)
       From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 17:01:02 +0000
     • Re: XPath and Validation (114 lines)
       From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 14:06:24 -0500
     • Re: XPath and Validation (147 lines)
       From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 21:07:53 +0100
     • Re: XPath and Validation (35 lines)
       From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 21:10:42 +0100
     • Re: XPath and Validation (44 lines)
       From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 20:04:30 +0000
     • Re: XPath and Validation (68 lines)
       From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 20:22:09 +0000
     • Re: XPath and Validation (40 lines)
       From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 16:47:03 -0500
     • Re: XPath and Validation (105 lines)
       From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 00:32:29 +0100
     • Re: XPath and Validation (28 lines)
       From: Matthew J. Dovey <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 09:45:50 -0000
     • Re: XPath and Validation (32 lines)
       From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 09:53:27 +0000
     • Re: XPath and Validation (53 lines)
       From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 11:47:31 +0100
     • Re: XPath and Validation (88 lines)
       From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 11:30:21 +0000
     • Re: XPath and Validation (105 lines)
       From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 06:56:49 -0500
     • Re: XPath and Validation (27 lines)
       From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 11:55:42 +0000
     • Re: XPath and Validation (133 lines)
       From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 16:24:16 +0100
     • Re: XPath and Validation (53 lines)
       From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 16:36:17 +0000
     • Re: XPath and Validation (112 lines)
       From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 20:51:01 +0100
     • Re: XPath and Validation (87 lines)
       From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 22:43:55 +0000
     • Re: XPath and Validation (25 lines)
       From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 19:42:21 -0500
     • Re: XPath and Validation (78 lines)
       From: Adam Dickmeiss <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2004 11:21:54 +0100
     • Re: XPath and Validation (121 lines)
       From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2004 14:06:41 +0000

116. xpath results (Re: namespaces for dc schema)
     • xpath results (Re: namespaces for dc schema) (30 lines)
       From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:05:25 -0500
     • Re: xpath results (Re: namespaces for dc schema) (43 lines)
       From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 14:28:38 +0000
     • Re: xpath results (Re: namespaces for dc schema) (15 lines)
       From: Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 10:12:26 -0500
     • Re: xpath results (Re: namespaces for dc schema) (37 lines)
       From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 15:18:35 +0000

117. ZeeRex versions
     • Re: ZeeRex versions (41 lines)
       From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
       Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2004 13:31:33 +0000