My sense of NCIP is that it was designed primarly for communication
between agencies that have negotiated a trust relationship offline and
configured their systems to interoperate.
It's not clear to me that NCIP will work well as a protocol for
transmitting ad hoc queries from an untrusted client to a host in order
to discover information about an item. Is your experience/research into
NCIP showing you something different?
Andrew Nagy wrote:
> Emily - we are investingating NCIP quite a bit here for use with VuFind. Maybe this might be an appropriate standard to standardize on?
> Take care,
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
>> Emily Lynema
>> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 9:42 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: [CODE4LIB] z39.50 holdings schema
>> Anybody in this group have any experience using / implementing the
>> z39.50 holdings schema?
>> As part of the DLF ILS Discovery Interface Task Force, we are looking
>> for a good schema to define holdings and item-related information (such
>> as circulation status). While MARCXML is always an option for MARC
>> holdings, I have the sense (aka, I know) that not all institutions /
>> ILSs create MARC holdings for all records. So it would be nice to have
>> schema into which it would be easy to translate either a MARC holdings
>> record or just local holdings stored in some other way + circulation
>> The rumor on the street is that z39.50 holdings schema is too complex
>> and has never really been used. Anyone want to confirm or deny?
>> I'm also interested in the up and coming ISO Holdings Schema (ISO
>> that it sounds like has been motivated along by OCLC-PICA. But I don't
>> have much information on that, so I'd be interested in hearing from
>> anyone who knows more about that one, as well.
>> Emily Lynema
>> Systems Librarian for Digital Projects
>> Information Technology, NCSU Libraries
>> [log in to unmask]