Re: Fwd: Format of concatenated UCD's

From: Francois Ochsenbein <francois-at-vizir.u-strasbg.fr>
Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2005 14:30:49 +0200

It would not be a good idea in my opinion -- better to keep a UCD as a single-word (no blank). 2 reasons: 1. XML is not the only way of expressing UCDs --- UCDs must also

   be available in other contexts and your solution introduces a    complication in these other contexts
2. Could be useful in the future to attach several UCDs to a

   quantity or some VO item -- then you would have to invent something    special to code this array of UCDs in XML

--Francois

>
>Haven't heard any response to this message suggesting an alternative means
>of concatenating UCDs to permit their parsing by an XML parser. Here's a
>forward to make sure you all got it.
>
>No, we don't yet have UCD's operating under a schema, but we might want
>to some day and it will be much less painful if we make the switch now.
>
>As far as I can tell, there's no obivous reason for the present choice of
>separator.
>
>Rick
>
>
>


Francois Ochsenbein       ------       Observatoire Astronomique de Strasbourg
   11, rue de l'Universite F-67000 STRASBOURG       Phone: +33-(0)390 24 24 29
Email: francois-at-astro.u-strasbg.fr   (France)         Fax: +33-(0)390 24 24 32
================================================================================
Received on 2005-06-03Z14:30:00