Date:         Tue, 9 Jul 2002 13:49:52 -0400
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: sort parameter
Comments: To: "Z39.50 Next-Generation Initiative" <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Well, the model is that the records aren't in any particular schema and they
get put into the requested schema on the fly.  So, when you ask for them to
be sorted, you ask that first the records be transformed to a particular
schema and then you sort them on a field (or fields) from that schema.
Doing this, there is no mixture of MODS and DC records.  There are only
records in the requested schema.

Ralph

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Taylor [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 11:49 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: sort parameter
>
>
> > Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 12:33:25 -0400
> > From: "LeVan,Ralph" <[log in to unmask]>
> >
> > Yes, XPath style tagpaths is what I meant, but I'm still willing to
> > go with Alan's minimal proposal.
>
> I know the XPath approach seems to be dying a quiet death, but I'd
> like to offer one more stake to drive through its heart: isn't it the
> case that this only works if you know the schema of all the record
> that you're going to be sorting?  And worse, if all the records have
> the _same_ schema?  Matthew's example (MODS and DC, I think it was)
> suggests that this isn't the case.
>
>  _/|_
> _______________________________________________________________
> /o ) \/  Mike Taylor   <[log in to unmask]>
> www.miketaylor.org.uk
> )_v__/\  There's been a lot of talk about the Declaration Mimics Use.
>          In fact, the declaration they use is simply, "I am a mimic".
>