[Ex-plain] Latest DTD (was ZIG) -- authority

Mike Taylor mike at tecc.co.uk
Thu Mar 21 14:47:23 CET 2002

> Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 13:19:01 +0000 (GMT)
> From: Robert Sanderson <azaroth at liverpool.ac.uk>
> > > Are you proposing that we need a rule that any aggregator should
> > > always turn off the flag for an aggregated record? I can accept
> > > that.
> > I like that because it's simple enough that no-one can possibly have
> > any excuse for implementing it wrongly, and it fails safe (i.e. it
> There is one excuse, but it's extremely lame.
> If the explain record to be aggregated is copyright under some 'you
> can distribute but not change' licence, then they would be legally
> obliged not to change the flag.

I believe that scenario transcends the "lame" description and goes
right through into "crippled" :-)

> Of course such records can simply not be aggregated until such time
> as they're released under a sensible licence ;)

Or we can just go ahead and change the bit anyway, and fight the
lawyers off with sticks, clubs and +3 flaming torches when they arrive
at our door.  [I'm OK, I have +2 on AC vs. undead.]  :-)

> Alright.  So, what's the name of the attribute, and where should it
> be?
> 'authoritative' on <metaInfo> ? or on the top level <explain> ?

Well, the "authoritative" bit is a metaInfo attribute of the explain
record, so I don't think an attribute _of_ the metaInfo works.  I
guess my favourite would an an "authoritative" attribute on <explain>,
but I could like with an <authoritative> element inside <metaInfo>.

> > > Sorry if I have missed something (still have a bit of a hassle
> > > getting to the site from here), but does the AggregatedFrom
> > > element provide enough information to retrieve the original
> > > record? Surely 'twould be cool if 'tdid. An http or z3950r URL
> > > should do it, I suppose.
> >
> > Has to be a z39.50r: URL, surely?  HTTP is no use to us here.
> SRW? I can also see people at least putting up records on the web if
> they can't or won't implement the z server for it.

Yeah, you're right.

> > On another note: Rob, are you planning to write the "commentary"
> > on the DTD?  If not, you should probably say so, and we can try to
> > get someone else to volunteer.  You're best placed, though.
> Depending on when it needs to be done by?

Definitely before the ZIG.

> If by the ZIG, then can I send you a compilation of notes or
> something?

I guess that would do.  Get them trimmed down and in order, and I'll
massage your plain text into HTML suitable for the site.  PLEASE
don't just send me a dump of your email log!

> (Have 1.5 chapters left to draft, then ~40k words of thesis, ~380k
> words of edition, and some thousand lines of code in various
> languages to go over)

Ha!  Well, then, what's another thousand words or so?  :-)

 _/|_	 _______________________________________________________________
/o ) \/  Mike Taylor   <mike at miketaylor.org.uk>   www.miketaylor.org.uk
)_v__/\  "``IMHO'' is only four keystrokes" -- Dave Foreman.

More information about the Ex-plain mailing list