RE: 2 simple questions (?)

Lennie,
This is typically an example of why Z39.50 without profiles is so hopelessly
complex in interoperability issues. The definition you cite says in fact:
the server can do what it wants. So if the server says: For me a normalized
name is a first name followed by 5 dots and then the last name: That is
perfectly legal Z39.50.

I will re-formulate my question:
What would a normalized name "normally" be:
<LastName> space <FirstName>
<LastName> comma <FirstName>
<LastName> comma space<FirstName>
or should the server support all of these?

For example, it is not clear to me what the Bath profile says.

Pieter
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Madeleine Stovel [mailto:BL.MDS@RLG.ORG]
> Envoyé : mardi 19 février 2002 22:11
> À : www-zig@w3.org
> Objet : 2 simple questions (?)
> 
> 
> REPLY TO 02/19/02 06:15 FROM WWW-ZIG@W3.ORG: 2 simple questions (?)
> 
> >Dear zig-gers,
> >2 simple question but I did not find the answers on the Z39.50 pages:
> >
> >1. normalized name
> >Is there a concensus about what a normalized name should be? 
> (Structure
> >attribute 106 "name (normalized)")
> >The standard says nothing about this.
> >The bath profile references the ATS-1 profile which 
> references AACR2 rules.
> >(http://lcweb.loc.gov/z3950/agency/profiles/ats.html)
> >
> >Maybe we should make an implementor agreement that it should be:
> ><LastName>,<FirstName>
> >with 0 or more spaces between <LastName> and comma, and 
> between comma and
> ><FirstName>
> >
> >
> >Pieter van Lierop
> >Geac
> Pieter,
> 
> The bib-1 semantics imply that that's what a normalized name should
> be.
> 
>         Name             101    A name search term that is 
> structured in a
>         (normalized)            particular order (e.g., last_name,
>                                 first_name).  The resulting 
> term is subject to
>                                 special matching rules on the 
> target system
>                                 that differ from those 
> applied to names
>                                 structured as phrases or 
> unstructured names.
> 
> I think what's in ATS-1 is more or less the consensus, although the
> consensus was also not to use ATS-1, more or less.
> 
> -- Lennie
> 
> To:  WWW-ZIG@W3.ORG
>

Received on Wednesday, 20 February 2002 02:41:13 UTC