Date:         Mon, 17 Jun 2002 16:21:24 +0100
Reply-To:     "Z39.50 Next-Generation Initiative" <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       "Z39.50 Next-Generation Initiative" <[log in to unmask]>
From:         Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Re: result set model for srw
Comments: To: [log in to unmask]
In-Reply-To:  <[log in to unmask]> (message from Ray Denenberg on Fri,
              14 Jun 2002 14:54:13 -0400)

> Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 14:54:13 -0400
> From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
>
> > So my concrete proposal is simply that the client should send, as
> > a part of the search request, a bit saying whether or not it wants
> > the server to maintain a persistent result set.
>
> We explored all of this, in great depth, at our first meeting a year
> ago.  There was strong sentiment not to do this as it would be a
> futile effort to define negotiation that wouldn't work in practice
> anyway.

Why not?

 _/|_    _______________________________________________________________
/o ) \/  Mike Taylor   <[log in to unmask]>   www.miketaylor.org.uk
)_v__/\  "What is this talk of 'release'?  Klingons do not make
         software 'releases'.  Our software 'escapes,' leaving a
         bloody trail of designers and quality assurance people in
         its wake." -- Klingon Programming Mantra