Date:         Tue, 4 Jan 2005 09:20:35 -0500
Reply-To:     "Z39.50 Next-Generation Initiative" <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       "Z39.50 Next-Generation Initiative" <[log in to unmask]>
From:         "LeVan,Ralph" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Re: Unsolicited response data
Comments: To: "Z39.50 Next-Generation Initiative" <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Z39.50 Next-Generation Initiative [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of
> Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress
> 
> So we could call it:
> 
> x-info-1-acceptAny
> 
> However we could instead call it:
> 
> x-info-1-accept
> 
> where there is a value,  i.e. 'any', thus the parameter:
> 'x-info-1-accept=any'.
> 
> This would leave room to later define other values, subclasses,
> which could be profiled.   Would this be preferable (and if so
> I would change the name of the info uri from
> 'info:srw/extension/1/will-accept-any-extra-data' to
> 'info:srw/extension/1/accept').

Ick.

If the SRU parameter is supposed to map to a URI, then what does the
structure URI=value mean?

Stick to x-info-1-acceptAny

Ralph