Re: BATH PROFILE - XML RECORDS

Sebastian Hammer wrote:

> >recordSyntax = XML or SUTRS
>
> This target appears to use an invalid encoding for XML records -- they come
> back as a BER-encoded datatype, whereas I am pretty sure that the proper
> way to represent XML is as an "Octet-aligned" type in the EXTERNAL.

The issue is with XML, not sutrs? In other words, sutrs come as
single-ASN1-type and that's ok?

> Ray, we looked around a bit but had a hard time finding a hard statement to
> this effect on the Maintenance agency site, or indeed in the record syntax
> list.

There is no recorded agreement on this.  We were never able to come to
agreement.  (There was a draft agreement,  I've looked everywhere and can't
find it, and unfortunately I don't remember exactly what it was.The list
archive earlier than 2000 has been lost.) However it's worth trying again, as I
think there is a good chance that the reasons we couldn't agree no longer apply
(i.e.  the "disagreers" might all be gone).

If we distinguish syntaxes that are described in ASN.1 (e.g. sutrs, grs-1) from
those that aren't (e.g. xml and all the marc sytntaxes)  it shouldn't be too
difficult to reach an agreement to use octet aligned for the latter.

--Ray