- 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