Date:         Thu, 27 Jun 2002 10:19:28 -0400
Reply-To:     "Z39.50 Next-Generation Initiative" <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       "Z39.50 Next-Generation Initiative" <[log in to unmask]>
From:         Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: Library Of Congress
Subject:      sort: error handling
Comments: To: "Z39.50 Next-Generation Initiative" <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Theo van Veen wrote:

> >I disagree. There should be an something saying that the results aren't
> >sorted as you expect them to be.
> >No good having a server apparently honour a request for a search on title,
> >sorted by date and then getting back the unsorted results.
>
> I think I meant that it should not return an error instead of the response. I agree with something saying that the results aren't sorted as you expected.

I think Rob means the server should not process the request if it determines that it cannot process it as requested.

I agree.  The client may or may not want the unsorted results when the server can't perform the sort.  The server has no way of knowing (and we certainly
don't want to put a flag to that effect in the request). If the client wants the unsorted results it can re-submit the request without the sort parameter.

We've debated this endlessly in Z39.50.  There are still a few holdouts who say that the server should make a best effort, but the broad consensus is that
the server should not waste time performing an operation that wasn't requested. (We've even defined the "flag" approach and to my knowledge, nobody has
implemented it.)

--Ray