- From: Alan Kent <ajk@mds.rmit.edu.au>
- Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 11:33:52 +1100 (EST)
- To: www-zig@w3.org
>>I think numeric USE attributes are so deep seated that its not even >>worth thinking about changing it unless Z39.50V4 came along with a >>radical revamp of the protocol. > >Beg to differ. V3 allows string-form attribute values, and with the >attribute set architecture we can have (string) attribute values that are >directly tied to the retrieval schema. Sorry, I was a bit loose. I really meant internal semantic identifiers that are not intended for end users to use - which includes numeric identifiers and string identifiers used in an attribute set. I actually had deleted a paragraph from the last mail saying that it may even be possible to define an attribute set instead of my CCLInfo explain category for string names for CCL fields which can then be bound to databases. That is, define an attribute set that only uses strings for USE attributes. But I did not like the idea much so was not going to even raise it. Alan
Received on Thursday, 23 November 2000 19:34:26 UTC