Hi,
I did not attend any of the theory sessions in Victoria, but Gerard's summary has prompted me to draw your attention to some possible crossover with the work of the Registry and Grid WGs.
The most obvious overlap is in the area described by Frédéric Boone's presentation on a parameter data model, where the Registry WG is defining a general model of an "application" including its parameters http://www.ivoa.net/twiki/bin/view/IVOA/RegDMApplications, which is based on the Common Execution Architecture (CEA) work within Astrogrid. CEA was originally designed to "wrap" legacy code as asynchronously callable web services (following the UWS pattern of the Grid WG http://www.ivoa.net/twiki/bin/view/IVOA/ IvoaGridAndWebServices#Asynchronous_activities_proposal) with parameter lists that were described in the registry so that user interfaces could be dynamically generated. Astrogrid has a mature implementation of CEA which includes
The CEA parameter model was intended to be as general as possible and I think that it would already be suitable for use as part of SNAP, though I would be interested in working with you to add any features that you thought necessary. In addition, whilst the access to pre- computed theoretical data sets might be considered to be "Data Access", I can see that there are use cases where the theoretician wants to instruct a service to run a program to generate new data with new parameters, which would fit better with the "Execution" pattern being developed as UWS from the Grid WG.
Paul Harrison Received on 2006-06-02Z10:50:34