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

Re: requesting XML records

From: Theo van Veen <Theo.vanVeen@kb.nl>
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 22:37:21 +0100
To: www-zig@w3.org
CC: theo van Veen <Theo.vanVeen@kb.nl>
Message-ID: <3E84CEA1.2861.26E3120@localhost>

On 28 Mar 2003 at 17:26, Mike Taylor wrote:

> > Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 18:05:56 +0100
> > From: "Theo van Veen" <Theo.vanVeen@kb.nl>
> >
> > >We will need either (A) a central registry for schema-like XML
> > >element-set names, or (B) as with clasic Z39.50 practice, an
> > >understanding that all element-set names other than a tiny
> > >hardwired set ("B" and "F") are undefined except in the context of
> > >a profile.  I don't think the latter is what Theo wants at all,
> > >since (as I understand his requirement) he wants to cross-search
> > >targets that do not adhere to his profile, if he even has one.
> > >(Right, Theo?)
> > 
> > Right. But to add some level of complexity: I do not mind having
> > names for brief and full DCX for example as long as it remains clear
> > that it is DCX. If different servers put different terms in brief
> > DCX I don't mind for the simple reason that what people put in there
> > will for 90% be something that I understand and the other 10% I just
> > ignore.
> 
> But unless there's a registry (or profiling), there's no guarantee
> that my server agrees with your client that DCX is "Dublin Core,
> Extended".  It might just as well be "Deep Custard, X-rated".
> 
Agreed. A schema saying "Qualified Dublin Core + <any /> for the rest" will do, I think. 
although our applications are intelligent enough to allow for agreements on a higher 
level.
 
Theo
Received on Friday, 28 March 2003 16:43:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 29 October 2009 06:12:23 GMT