[ZOOM] Responses to Qns
azaroth at liverpool.ac.uk
Tue Jul 16 17:56:21 CEST 2002
> > Err, there really wasn't anything ZOOMish talked about to report. I
> > mentioned half heartedly the idea of having a ZOOM/SRW binding, but
> > Matthew pointed out that you can't execute functions on objects
> > returned from a web service.
> Well, first of all, this was supposed to be a ZiNG meeting, not an SRW
> meeting! You'll recall from the MA's own ZiNG page at
There wasn't really anything to talk about for ZOOM and ZeeRex as I was
the only person there with any link to either.
(BTW, wrong list I know but, we decided that the Explain function for
SRW should be based on ZeeRex but should be a different schema, for
> > > I think we're just talking about one option -- a single concession
> > > to server brokenness -- that means "Watch it! This server will
> > My thought is that if it's not an X-, does that mean that everyone
> > needs to support it? This isn't as simple a case as just copying
> > the elementset across on to the result set as mine, it requires some
> > actual processing which seems to almost certainly include at least 6
> > network transactions:
> I have to admit that I don't really follow this argument.
> What's propose is a single option which can be used to tell the ZOOM
> client library "don't use result-set names other than 'default' on
> this connection". Now _one_ of reasons you might want this is because
> the connection is to a server which, whatever it might have told you
> at negotiation time, doesn't support multiple (named) result sets.
Ahhh! I misunderstood and thought it was directly associated with the
broken Voyager handling of sort. An option that says 'always reuse result
set name' is fine.
> Does anyone other than Rob like this idea? :-)
I retract the idea now that I understand the way that the option works.
I thought that the library had to determine it or not.
> BTW., looking again at that page, I notice that it's pretty feeble: it
> has no link to the Tcl binding specification, nor any information
> about the Cheshire implementation. That's _very_ out of date, isn't
> If you can send me a link to the binding documentation (there is some,
> right?) and to downloadable source, I'll update the binding
I'll have a look for it and let you know.
,'/:. Rob Sanderson (azaroth at liverpool.ac.uk)
,'--/::(@)::. Special Collections and Archives, extension 3142
,'---/::::::::::. Twin Cathedrals: telnet: liverpool.o-r-g.org 7777
____/:::::::::::::. WWW: http://liverpool.o-r-g.org:8000/
I L L U M I N A T I
More information about the ZOOM