Ana,
let me use your comments to clarify some of the issues (especially for those not present at the last InterOp meeting):
Quoting Ana Ines Gomez de Castro <anai_gomez-at-mat.ucm.es>:
>
> 1. Why do you need two bodies "the scientific board" and the "semantics
> WG" to approve a new UCD?. Do you envission the SciBoard a "technical
> body" and the "Semantics WG" a "political-coordinating body"?
>
Up to now the WG "UCDs" was taking care only of UCDs. At the InterOp meeting
the mission (and consequently the name) of the WG has been broadened to
cover:
- UCDs: Maintenance of the list of UCD words;
- Semantics: definition of standard vocabulary(ies) in the fields covered by
IVOA activities;
- Ontologies: explore what, how, why.
The Sci-Board and the WG are not two separate bodies/entities: the Sci-Board is a group working within the WG to fulfill one of the missions of the WG. The final responsibility towards the IVOA Exec and the community at large resides in the WG (the Board has been appointed by the WG, not by the Exec).
> From our previous experience, I think that to accept a new UCD we require:
> - To test that the proposed new UCD cannot be made as a combination of the
> already existing.
> - To check that it is scientifically meaningful
> Is the SciBoard going to be responsible of both duties?
>
Right so. I'd add that the proposed modification should be considered non
only meaningful, but also used/useful. The list of UCDs is not a data
model.
> 2. I assume that the rigidity in the updating of the UCD list (the
> list is updated during the InterOp meetings) is caused by the fact
> that once a new UCD is accepted the data providers have to include it
> in their "protocols", am I right?
>
In short, yes. You probably noticed that the procedure is rather "informal"
and "asynchronous" at the beginning (RFM, discussion in the Board) and it
becomes more "formal" in its second part (the actual update of the list).
This is because in the IVOA there is only one way to establish (or
re-establish, as in this case) what is an "IVOA standard" and how.
> 3. Concerning the web based form... don't you think that it would be
> good to have a Comments field where the "history" of the UCD
> approval/disapproval is recorded?. It is feasible that a scientist,
> after receiving the notification of "rejection" answers to the SciBoard
> providing new reasons for the inclusion of the UCD word, eventually some
> of these reasons maybe relevant and the SciBoard may reconsider the
> rejection.
>
First of all, let me say that the actual page at
http://vizier.u-strasbg.fr/UCD/cgi-bin/comment/ucdComments
is only a test page, still to be upgraded to fulfil the requested needs. But
the page is already an interface to a database of ALL requests (showing the
"history", as you say). The RFM form is accessible from this page.
As for the case of "new reasons" for a resubmission, well why not
resubmitting! You won't lose the thread (already activated by user, by
date, by ucd).
All this answers also your next comment:
> I have not the slighlest idea about the degree of activity we might
> expect from the Community BUT it maybe a good policy to keep all the
> "rejected UCDs" in data base so, any time someone wish to propose a new
> UCD, the data base can be cross-checked so some time can be saved to
> the Chair of the SciBoard. Maybe this list could be accessible to the
> Community.
>
> 4. I do not understand well why on the on hand, it may be necessary to
> insert rapidly a new UCD (with the "temporary namespace "ivoa:"") and
> at the same time accept that the list of UCD's is updated in time-scales
> of InterOp meetings.
>
This is just because the time-scale of the process of approving an IVOA
Recommendation starting from the status of WD can take a few months (>2)!
> Hope it helps!.
Yes, indeed!
Cheers,
Andrea
Andrea Preite Martinez andrea.preitemartinez-at-rm.iasf.cnr.it Istituto di Astrofisica Spaziale Tel.:+39.06.4993.4641 Area di Ricerca di Tor Vergata Fax.:+39.06.2066.0188 Via del Fosso del Cavaliere 100 Cell:+39.339.3817355 00133 Roma CDS :+33.3.90242473 ==============================================================================Received on 2005-10-19Z11:38:18