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
eric_at_hellman.net
http://go-to-hellman.blogspot.com/
Received on Mon Sep 14 2009 - 13:56:12 EDT