I agree with Paul, including the type would give a GUI client some clue
as to what icon to show.
Being pedantic about the wording for the specification, is it 'must' or 'should'.
If it is 'should', then it means
A server 'should' include the types, if it can, but a very simple server implementation 'may' leave them out.
A client 'must' be able to handle a list with types, but it 'must' also be able to handle a response without them.
If it is 'must', then it means
A server 'must' always include the types. A client 'must' be able to handle a list with types.
Personally, I'd prefer 'should' (avoid explicit limits in the spec. if we don't need them), but I'm happy to go with the consensus.
Dave
Paul Harrison wrote:
> I think that it should attempt to return the full type if possible,
> as even for minimum listing, as certainly for vospace 1.+ this
> enables the client to make some sort of decision as to whether they
> want to query further...
>
> Paul Harrison
> ESO Garching
> www.eso.org
>
> On 19.07.2007, at 21:10, Matthew Graham wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Should a min or props listing return the xsi:type of the node: e.g.
>>
>> <node xsi:type="StructuredDataNode" uri="vos://nvo.caltech!vospace/
>> mytable1"/>
>>
>> or at this level of detail is OK just to return a higher node type:
>>
>> <node xsi:type="DataNode" uri="vos://nvo.caltech!vospace/mytable1"/>
>>
>> ?
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Matthew
>
Received on 2007-07-20Z13:19:37