- From: Theo van Veen <Theo.vanVeen@kb.nl>
- Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2001 15:52:03 +0100
- To: <azaroth@liverpool.ac.uk>
- Cc: <www-zig@w3.org>
Yes, maybe it is a little bit too early to recommend ZNG. On the other hand I believe that with the current knowledge and experience on Z39.50, http and XML it should not take a very long time to establish a first version for ZNG and some people might want to anticipate on these kind of developments. I don't see the availability of clients as a problem, because these can be made with HTML and XSL, which is accessible to a large group of developers. I would like if there already pilot ZNG-servers available? Theo van Veen P.S. The word "not" in the first line of my original message was a mistake. >>> Robert Sanderson <azaroth@liverpool.ac.uk> 19-10-01 11:42 >>> > Maybe it makes sense not to invest in Z39.50 Next Generation (XML over ^^^^^ > http) and convert the different XML records to a common XML-format. > The ZNG prototype 1 WSDL definition can be found at > http://www.lib.ox.ac.uk/jafer/zng/zng-p1.wsdl.html . The > implementation barrier is rather low. There are no clients, the specification isn't set, even the entire methodology isn't proven. I think that recommending ZNG in its current state as an alternative to Z39.50 'classic' is doing a disservice to everybody involved. Yes, the initiative looks good, but it's only been worked on by a select group of people for a little while, off and on. It looks like a viable direction to be heading, but I don't think anyone would argue that it's currently ready for production services. Rob -- ,'/:. Rob Sanderson (azaroth@liverpool.ac.uk) ,'-/::::. http://www.o-r-g.org/~azaroth/ ,'--/::(@)::. Special Collections and Archives, extension 3142 ,'---/::::::::::. Syrinnia: telnet: syrinnia.o-r-g.org 7777 ____/:::::::::::::. WWW: http://syrinnia.o-r-g.org:8000/ I L L U M I N A T I
Received on Friday, 19 October 2001 09:56:30 UTC