You're absolutely correct, in fact, all the <ent>_val fields are
reserved for future use! They went in and out of the spec. I'm trying
to remember from my notes. It's better that they're out.
On Sep 14, 2009, at 2:05 PM, Rosalyn Metz wrote:
sorry eric, i was reading straight from the documentation and
according to
it it has no use.
On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 1:55 PM, Eric Hellman <[email protected]>
wrote:
It's not correct to say that rft_val has no use; when used, it should
contain a URL-encoded package of xml or kev metadata. it would be
correct
to say it is very rarely used.
On Sep 14, 2009, at 1:40 PM, Rosalyn Metz wrote:
ok no one shoot me for doing this:
in section 9.1 Namespaces [Registry] of the OpenURL standard
(z39.88) it
actually provides an example of using a URL in the rfr_id field,
and i
wonder why you couldn't just do the same thing for the rft_id
also there is a field called rft_val which currently has no use.
this
might
be a good one for it.
just my 2 cents.
Eric Hellman
President, Gluejar, Inc.
41 Watchung Plaza, #132
Montclair, NJ 07042
USA
[email protected]
http://go-to-hellman.blogspot.com/
