W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-zig@w3.org > March 2003

RE: requesting XML records

From: Matthew Dovey <matthew.dovey@las.ox.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 12:26:06 -0000
Message-ID: <149B1E6A2147804D9651886835D1999A2007EC@sers004.ouls.ox.ac.uk>
To: "Mike Taylor" <mike@indexdata.com>, <Theo.vanVeen@kb.nl>
Cc: <a.powell@UKOLN.AC.UK>, <www-zig@w3.org>

> >> Yes.  I agree this is an issue.  What I think you want to do is 
> >> request a metadata record that conforms to any 
> 'application profile' 
> >> that is based on 'simple DC'.
> I think this is a good articulation of Theo's problem, and 
> I'd like Theo either to confirm this, or explain why I am 
> wrong.  If we can all agree that this is what you really want 
> to say, Theo, then we have a better chance of actually 
> solving your problem.
> (Background for those who are not on the ZNG list: we've had 
> much the same discussion with Theo on that list, and the 
> rather depressing conclusion seemed to be that Theo wanted to 
> ask for "records that are either in schema A or 'reasonably 
> close'", which of course is not something you can ask a 
> computer to judge.  If it turns out that "based on simple DC" 
> is an adequate paraphrase for Theo's needs, we may have some 
> mileage after all.)

The solution I was proposing on the ZNG list - which I still think would
work, would be to specify four record syntaxes that we can ask for:

Strict simple DC - i.e. must use all the DC elements and only those.
Strict qualified DC
Loose simple DC - i.e. can include other non-DC elements
Loose qualified DC

(I think the names I used were different).

Hopefully the semantics of this could be such that a server could
validly return a strict simple DC record when requested for all these
formats, i.e. use of the others is a hint to the server that the client
is prepared to except a richer record.

Received on Thursday, 27 March 2003 07:26:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:26:05 UTC