On Fri, 10 Oct 2003, Tony Linde wrote:
> > By analogy for ADQL, we would describe the columns as part of the
> > description of the service (e.g. SkyNode) that accepts ADQL
> > (under the
> > Capability element).
>
> You've lost me. Where would you put columns in Capability?
See ConeSearch-v0.1.xsd (& SIA-v0.5.xsd) and adil-v0.8.3.xml. Look for VOTableColumns.
This is not to say that you shouldn't describe columns in a description of a table (collection) resource. On that front, I think we (or rather a group that would prefer to see it this way) should define a separate TableCollection resource class. That is, we need not have conformity IVOA-wide at this level. This would be an excellent example of one project extending the schema for their own purposes.
> > For the purpose of our next round of demos, it is NVO's
> > thinking that we
> > do not plan to support locating tables based on UCDs; so, for
> > the moment,
> > we're not planning to capture this info in our registries.
>
> Is there a description of what NVO plans to do with the registries
> somewhere?
Sorry--I'm not trying to surprise you here. We actually discussed this issue just yesterday on our telecon, so, no, there is not a document where all of this is written down. I think, though, that this is all negotiable, but I don't think we can settle everything before we see each other face to face.
cheers,
Ray
PS: I'll be signing off in the next hour or so to make my way to the airport. I'm looking forward to buying you a beer! Received on 2003-10-10Z20:44:42