Date:         Wed, 17 Dec 2003 17:02:00 +0000
Reply-To:     "Z39.50 Next-Generation Initiative" <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       "Z39.50 Next-Generation Initiative" <[log in to unmask]>
From:         Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Re: versioning for context sets and record schemas
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

> > For that matter if cql is used outside of srw, how is the version to
> > be indicated?
> I am half inclined to write this off as "out of band agreement".  I

What does SQL do?  To the best of my knowledge they just deprecate all
older versions (SQL99/SQL92/SQL86(?))

Not to say that we should do the same thing, but I don't think that the
query needs to provide its own metadata (beyond prefixes).

Each SRW version could say which CQL version should be used with it, and
just have it set in stone there?


Rob

--
      ,'/:.          Dr Robert Sanderson ([log in to unmask])
    ,'-/::::.        http://www.o-r-g.org/~azaroth/
  ,'--/::(@)::.      Special Collections and Archives, extension 3142
,'---/::::::::::.    Nebmedes:  http://nebmedes.o-r-g.org:8000/
____/:::::::::::::.
I L L U M I N A T I