Re: [Refdb-devel] Once more the ruby bindings

[Bruce D'A. <bru...@Op...>]

On Apr 11, 2006, at 7:42 AM, Markus Hoenicka wrote:

>> Furthermore I currently think about a SOAP bindings implemented in 
>> Ruby
>> to access the refdb database. This will deliver a standards compliant
>> interface to the server and deserve as a good starting point for 
>> future
>> interfaces.
>
> Sounds cool. What about SRW? I thought implementing an SRW interface 
> using
> Indexdata's SimpleServer, but if it is trivial to add this 
> functionality to
> your SOAP code you might as well do it.

Yikes. Sebastian, why would you use SOAP?  A RESTful approach like SRU 
or the new unAPI would be much simpler all around.

>> Furthermore the ruby on rails webapp will be part of the new project. 
>> I
>> am still thinking about accessing the database directly from the 
>> webapp.

Yeah, I was wondering when you were going to say this. The whole point 
of Rails is really the OO-relational mapping. And then you start to 
wonder what you have that is still "RefDB."

> - you'll have to change your code whenever I do. I'm just compiling a 
> proposal
> how to extend the RIS model to make it easier to implement and 
> understand. This
> will require thorough changes to the SQL database schemas.

What changes are you contemplating to the SQL model Markus?

FWIW, I've come to the conclusion that reference data really comes down 
to these primary entities: Reference (anything citable), Collection 
(periodicals, archival collections, series), Event (workshops, 
conferences, etc.), and Contributor (authors, publishers, translator, 
etc.).

When you remove the requirement that all data must fit in a level 
model, then you offer more flexibility: horizontal relations such as a 
translation to an original, a speech presented at some event, etc.

Bruce