Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.
Comment: use a OpenURLCO container or not? As KE expert group, do we have a recommendation for one of the two methods?

...

Code Block
xml
xml
linenumbertrue
titlerecord 1 method 1 : all Context Objects in one OAI-PMH record : OAI-PMH listRecords metadataPrefix=ctxo
collapsetrue
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<OAI-PMH>
...
<record>
    <header>
        <identifier>urn:uuid:fd23522ee5d037a0-c447633c-480111df-9be4a08a-c93c60a2d5500800200c9a66 </identifier>
        <datestamp>2009-06-02T14:10:02Z</datestamp>
    </header>
    <metadata>
        <context-objects xmlns="info:ofi/fmt:xml:xsd:ctx">
            <context-object> ... </context-object>object xmlns="info:ofi/fmt:xml:xsd:ctx" datestamp="2009-06-01T19:20:57Z">
            <context-object>  ...
            </context-object>
             </context-objects><context-object xmlns="info:ofi/fmt:xml:xsd:ctx" datestamp="2009-06-01T19:20:57Z">
    </metadata>
</          ...
            </context-object>
        </context-objects>
    </metadata>
</record>
...
</OAI-PMH>

In the aforementioned example, the OAI-PMH record is identified by a UUID (in form of a URI), see RFC 4122. When offering single <context-object> documents rather than an aggregation using <context-objects> containers like above, a conformal OAI-PMH record may look like the following:

Code Block
xml
xml
linenumbertrue
titlerecord method 2 : each Context Object in separate OAI-PMH getRecord identifier=(URI) records : OAI-PMH listRecords metadataPrefix=ctxo
collapsetrue
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<OAI-PMH>
...
<record>
    <header>
        <identifier>urn:uuid:fd23522e-c447-4801-9be4-c93c60a2d550 </identifier>
        <datestamp>2009-06-02T14:10:02Z</datestamp>
    </header>
    <metadata>
        <context-object xmlns="info:ofi/fmt:xml:xsd:ctx" datestamp="2009-06-01T19:20:57Z">
          ...
        </context-object>
    </metadata>
</record>
...
</OAI-PMH>

<record>
    <header>
        <identifier>urn:uuid:1ad69103-6bd0-4a90-ae75-e4b644c136a6 </identifier>
        <datestamp>2009-06-02T14:10:04Z</datestamp>
    </header>
    <metadata>
        <context-object xmlns="info:ofi/fmt:xml:xsd:ctx" datestamp="2009-06-01T19:21:07Z">
          ...
        </context-object>
    </metadata>
</record>
...
</OAI-PMH>
Warning

As KE expert group, do we have a recommendation for one of the two methods?

5.2. SUSHI

OAI-PMH is a relatively light-weight protocol which does not allow for a bidirectional traffic. If a more reliable error-handling is required, the Standardised Usage Statistics Harvesting Initiative (SUSHI) must be used. SUSHI http://www.niso.org/schemas/sushi/ was developed by NISO (National Information Standards Organization) in cooperation with COUNTER. This document assumes that the communication between the aggregator and the usage data provider takes place as is explained in figure 1.

Figure 1.
The interaction commences when the log aggregator sends a request for a report about the daily usage of a certain repository. Two parameters must be sent as part of this request: (1) the date of the report and (2) the file name of the most recent robot filter. The filename that is mentioned in this request will be compared to the local filename. Four possible responses can be returned by the repository.

...