On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 4:09 AM, Jakob Voss <jakob.v...@gbv.de> wrote:

> Am I right that neither OpenURL nor COinS strictly defines a metadata model
> with a set of entities/attributes/fields/you-name-it and their definition?
> Apparently all ContextObjects metadata formats are based on non-normative
> "implementation guidelines" only ??

You are right.  Z39.88 and (by extension) COinS really only defines
the ContextObject itself.  So it defines the carrier "package", it's
administrative elements, referents, referrers, referringentities,
services, requester and resolver and their transports.

It doesn't really specify what should actually go into any of those
slots.  The idea is that it defers to the community profiles for that.

In the XML context object, you can send more than one metadata-by-val
element (or metadata-by-ref) per entity (ref, rfr, rfe, svc, req, res)
- I'm not sure what is supposed to happen, for example, if you send a
referent that has multiple MBV elements that don't actually describe
the same thing.


Reply via email to