Re: VOTable session @ Interop.Moscow

From: Pierre Didelon <pdidelon-at-cea.fr>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 14:44:24 +0200


Hi all,
a comment on ID attribute,
BR
Pierre Didelon

Mark Taylor wrote:

> On Wed, 20 Sep 2006, Francois Ochsenbein wrote:
>
>

>>Hi VOTablers,
>>
>>The attendence at this IVOA session is rather sparse -- and we were
>>just 8 persons at the VOTable session. Quite easy to take decisions,
>>but a larger consensus is wished...
>>
>>The viewgraphs are available from
>>http://www.ivoa.net/twiki/bin/view/IVOA/InterOpSep2006VOTable

>
>
> Francois et al.,
>
> Sorry I couldn't make it to Moscow. I have one or two comments on
> issues mentioned in the presentation on the wiki:
>
> 1. ID attribute on TR element
> 2. Recursivity in RESOURCE elements
>
> As I understand it, both of these are suggestions to change the
> VOTable definition in order to accommodate the behaviour of
> some specific software items (automatic code generation tools)
> which are buggy or incomplete. I do not support this course of
> action. Changing the standard in response to vagaries of
> specific software items is unlikely to lead to a clear standard,
> and is likely to be overtaken by events as the implementation
> status of existing software changes or as new software arises.
I completly agree with your argument. Usage of (uncomplete/limited/...) sofwares should not impact specifications/standard construction, which must mainly be conduct by "science" use-cases. Nevertheless if I have no opinion about the recursivity, I am in favour of a possible usage (and so its inclusion in the schema) of ID attribute on TR element. It could be use by example to "materialise" in a generic VOTAble way, the cross-identification between two catalog (row by row), or allow anykind of link from row to row. Does it make sens? Received on 2006-09-21Z14:45:22