Re: Z38.58 reference in Z39.50

On Fri, Jul 05, 2002 at 10:34:10AM -0400, Ray Denenberg wrote:
> 
> One of the comments to the Z39.50-2002 ballot
> notes that there remains references to Z39.58,
> which no longer exists.  I propose to:
> 
> 1. delete the Z39.58 citation in the reference
> section (1.3), and
> 
> 2. change the definition of type-100 in 3.2.2.1,
> from:
> "Type-100 is the Z39.58 type query, specified in
> ANSI Z39.58."
> to:
> "Type-100 is the Common Command Language query;
> its syntax is not specified by this standard."
> 
> If anyone objects to this change please let me
> know.
> 
> --Ray

I would prefer different wording. ISO8777 is called Common Command Language.
That is, both Z39.58 and ISO8777 used the same name. I don't know all
the politics etc, but I think it would be confusing to list ISO8777 (type 2)
and "Common Command Language" (type 100) separately since if Z39.58 is
deemed not to exist, then ISO8777 is the only "Common Command Langauge"
that exists. Type 100 is different to ISO8777 (type 2) isn't it?

I would rather keep it factual. For example say it was reserved for Z39.58,
but Z39.58 never reached formal approval.

Deprication could be considered, but that does not worry me that much.
(You would have to work out who has implemented it.) Similarly, you 
*could* say type 2 is recommended (since it does exist as a standard).
But again, not stressed.

Alan
-- 
Alan Kent (mailto:ajk@mds.rmit.edu.au, http://www.mds.rmit.edu.au/~ajk/)
Project: TeraText Technical Director, InQuirion Pty Ltd (www.inquirion.com)
Postal: Multimedia Database Systems, RMIT, GPO Box 2476V, Melbourne 3001.
Where: RMIT MDS, Bld 91, Level 3, 110 Victoria St, Carlton 3053, VIC Australia.
Phone: +61 3 9925 4114  Reception: +61 3 9925 4099  Fax: +61 3 9925 4098

Received on Sunday, 7 July 2002 21:23:26 UTC