Subject: Re: QL'98 W3C Query Languages Workshop Dec 3-4
Ray Denenberg (rden@loc.gov)
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 14:28:21 -0500
Message-Id: <36377055.B6221588@rs8.loc.gov> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 14:28:21 -0500 From: Ray Denenberg <rden@loc.gov> To: gils@cni.org Subject: Re: QL'98 W3C Query Languages Workshop Dec 3-4 References: <72B89459DD2BD211B5CD0000F840094E06CA5C@oa3-server.dev.oclc.org>
Ralph LeVan <levan@oclc.org> wrote:
>
> I expect to be at this meeting with a general Z39.50 hat on. But, be
> warned that Z39.50 will NOT be the W3C sanctioned query environment.
> The best we can hope for is that the experience and requirements of
> the Z39.50 community are supportable in the chosen architecture.
I appreciate Ralph's efforts on behalf of Z39.50, but since
he has taken this defeatist attitude, someone else in
addition to Ralph needs to be there with the Z39.50 "hat".
Far as I know, I can't go, as I don't belong to w3c. Are
there other Z39.50 folks, who can present Z39.50 in a more
positive light, who might attend?
I am NOT convinced that Z39.50 will not be sanctioned, and
this is not simply naivety. Yes, I do understand the
politics, history, etc., of the situation, so I don't need
to be reminded of all that. And I've already been told,
pointedly and a number of times, that I'm nuts (and worse).
So no need to remind me of that either.
I simply persist in my belief that sanity will prevail. But
someone needs to be at that meeting who will argue for
Z39.50, not just that "the experience and requirements" be
reflected in the chosen architecture. And this is important
not just for the Z39.50 community, but equally important for
the web community, which doesn't understand the problem.
And I don't really need to re-iterate the problem but I'll
do it anyway: 15 years or more of intellectual effort from
hundreds of librarians, scientists, computer experts, and
content experts worldwide has gone into the makings of a
mature, reasonably comprehensive, and still evolving
information retrieval standard. After a few years, the w3c
folks will realize that many features of Z39.50 are features
they need. At that point, they may adopt Z39.50 (a few years
too late) or they may try to develop a protocol of their
own, and spend the next 10 years doing it, without the
benefit of the expertise and insight from the people who
developed Z39.50.
Now I know alot of people take this view but are either
intimidated or frustrated by the w3c mentality, as once
paraphrased by Ralph: "Z39.50? that's a library protocol.
Why would it be relevant to the web?". Ralph has also
stated (publically) that he feels that if he were to
continue to push Z39.50 to the w3c he would loose
credibility (or something to that effect). I'm sorry that
Ralph has become so frustrated and/or intimidated, but the
fact is, we need positive representation at that meeting.
Any volunteers? I'll do what I can to help, from here.
I'm sorry to come down hard on Ralph, and I appologize if
I've misrepresented his views. He's still my good friend
(don't know if I'm still his, though, after this message).
-- Ray Denenberg Library of Congress 202-707-5795 rden@loc.gov
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a16 : Tue Mar 23 1999 - 03:55:44 EST