Date:         Fri, 16 Nov 2001 22:11:31 -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: record numbers
Comments: To: "Z39.50 Next-Generation Initiative" <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Definitley a good idea to add to the extension list.  I'm still very much in
favor of the current very thin interface, but have no problems on agreeing
on a set of extensions for another response schema.

Ralph

-----Original Message-----
From: Theo van Veen [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 6:08 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: record numbers


The way SRW will be used is probably not only by gateways but also by
ordinary web-pages with local stylesheets. That  happens to be the way I am
testing our server. In such cases it is extremely usefull when the client
does not have to keep session context between succeeding pages. It makes the
interaction between client and server much more robust and simple. One of
the tags that would be convenient in this respect is a record number at each
record. In a previous mail I also mentioned the possibility of having the
original query as part of the session context.
In our implementation we also return unkown url-parameters as xml-tags in
the container-tag <unknown>. This allows applications (in fact these
applications are simple web-pages) to create their own session context
without adding complexity to the server and at the same it serves as some
kind of diagnostic for faulty parameter names.

Theo