Date:         Tue, 4 Jan 2005 09:16:25 +0000
Reply-To:     "Z39.50 Next-Generation Initiative" <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       "Z39.50 Next-Generation Initiative" <[log in to unmask]>
From:         Dr Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Re: Betr.: Unsolicited response data (Re: British Library Test
              SRU Service)
Comments: To: "Z39.50 Next-Generation Initiative" <[log in to unmask]>
Comments: cc: [log in to unmask]
In-Reply-To:  <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed

> I expect that this extension will be in the future be used quite often
> for sru clients, so lets keep the sru parameter name/value short, e.g
> -x=ok.

That would be giving this particular extension a lot of preference over
any other.  While it's up to Ray to define the parameter name, there's no
reason to break with the naming scheme we already have for extensions

(x-info-<owner>-<name>)

> restricted by the limited capabilities of static clients. I anticipate
> clients that can be adapted by the user to fit the users needs based on
> what a server may have to offer.

And the same applies here as my previous messages ... if the client can
handle it, then the client can request it.

Rob

       ,'/:.          Dr Robert Sanderson ([log in to unmask])
     ,'-/::::.        http://www.o-r-g.org/~azaroth/
   ,'--/::(@)::.      Dept. of Computer Science, Room 805
,'---/::::::::::.    University of Liverpool
____/:::::::::::::.  L5R Shop: http://www.cardsnotwords.com/
I L L U M I N A T I