1. Bath Profile - vendor considerations Page 1 The Bath Profile - vendor considerations Rob Bull

2. Bath Profile - vendor considerations Page 2 What vendors ? Bespoke system developers: –software houses –data providers Library cataloguing system vendors Suppliers of client packages/gateways Developers of other profiles Toolkit suppliers

3. Bath Profile - vendor considerations Page 3 Software Implications To existing services/systems: –Z39.50 components –database components –user interface components Consideration for new services/systems Maintenance/Administration Toolkits/APIs Decision for which functional area and conformance level to achieve.

4. Bath Profile - vendor considerations Page 4 Existing Services/Systems Need to look at which functional area to fit into : –server side may be determined by specifications of the database package –client side may be determined by scope of user interface requirements Need to look at which conformance level to fit into : –decide if additional development is necessary to raise current conformance level.

5. Bath Profile - vendor considerations Page 5 Existing Services/Systems Z39.50 Scan Service: –many systems do not support scan Record Retrieval: –many systems do not support GRS.1 or XML Holdings: –do any systems support the new Holdings profile ? Character set and language negotiation: –very little implementation.

6. Bath Profile - vendor considerations Page 6 New Services/Systems Look at requirements from customers - see how they align to the profile. Make users/customers aware of the profile and its importance. Look at related national profiles, (e.g, Finnish, CENL, ONE-2, DanZig) for similar conformance. Will database support Character set and language negotiation ?.

7. Bath Profile - vendor considerations Page 7 Database Systems Database functionality determines much of the target functionality Will the database search capabilities support the profile attribute combinations ? Will the database support suitable indexing for the scan service ?

8. Bath Profile - vendor considerations Page 8 Maintenance/Administration Client side: –predictability of server behaviour –conformance to the profile should reduce administration and the need to set up individual tables of attributes etc. Server side: –new indexes ? –supported search capability ? –Character sets ?

9. Bath Profile - vendor considerations Page 9 Functionality/Conformance There is no easy way of determining within the Z39.50 protocol the level of functionality or conformance supported by a client or server : –could be easily crafted on the Init service using a simple XML definition –use of XML is being tested in the ONE-2 project.

10. Bath Profile - vendor considerations Page 10 Toolkits No new crafted ASN.1 in the profile: –should not impact on popular freeware Z39.50 toolkits, for example those of Crossnet and Index Data. –vendors who use other Z39.50 toolkits will need to establish if there is support for GRS.1, character set and language negotiation etc.

11. Bath Profile - vendor considerations Page 11 Questions Is this the big one... ? –…or just another in a line of profiles, and should I wait to see what emerges next year ? Who is going to prove the profile is successful ? –ONE-2 project will address a significant portion, but these are mainly bespoke systems and not COTS systems.

12. Bath Profile - vendor considerations Page 12 Questions What about the new attribute architecture being designed ? How do I create a companion profile for my community ? –CIMI is considering writing guidelines for profile development.

13. Bath Profile - vendor considerations Page 13 Benefits Conformance to a profile ensures predictability to developers and users, –removes the syndrome: “code is there because that’s how that system behaves” Provides a stable basis to extend in the future.

14. Bath Profile - vendor considerations Page 14 Drawbacks At some time, the line of profiles being developed has to stop to enable vendors the opportunity to catch up with their developments. Is a low level of conformance really just an opt-out escape clause, or should developers and vendors bite the bullet and aim for a higher conformance level.