On Thu, 17 Jun 2010, [email protected] wrote:
> I'd like to stick my oar in here and be explicit about something I think 
> Eddie Shin is hinting at-- it's hard to think of a use case where building 
> FOXML is really the best way to get objects built. Using the APIs has always 
> been more efficient and pleasant for us. I think I can accurately claim that 
> all modifications that would appear in an object's FOXML representation are 
> supported by the SOAP API-M, and almost all are supported by the REST API-M.

Could you explain what you mean by you can't think of a use case where building 
the foxml is the best way to get objects built?

For contrast, our use case is that our collection management system exports 
large batches of XML, and it's relatively simple to batch build foxml (using 
the provided command line or GUI tools) which can be ingested easily using the 
provided command line or GUI tools.

-Deborah
-- 
Deborah Kaplan
Digital Resources Archivist
Digital Collections and Archives
Tufts University

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate 
GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the 
lucky parental unit.  See the prize list and enter to win: 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo
_______________________________________________
Fedora-commons-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fedora-commons-users

Reply via email to