Problems about the Spectrum Data Model from the view of a Web Service programmer
mjg at cacr.caltech.edu
Fri Sep 15 06:46:57 PDT 2006
Yet again I find myself in the position of agreeing with Alasdair: there
is nothing wrong with mixed content. In fact, it is used elsewhere in
the IVOA already (either in Registry resource records or VOEvent - I
can't remember which offhand but have definitely come across it) so if
we don't want to use it, we should be consistent right across the IVOA -
a radical idea I know!
Alasdair Allan wrote:
> Gerard wrote:
>> I think irrespective of this, we might in the IVOA attempt to not use
>> content in serialisations of data and metadata simply beacues of
>> examples as
>> Alasdair mentions.
> Actually I was arguing precisely the opposite point, I don't really
> see anything wrong with mixed content.
>> We can do without and it will be much simpler to
>> transform between different representations (code, databasesof a given
>> underlying model if every data element is explcitily named.
> Every data element is explicitly named in both examples I gave you.
>> Mixed content will allow things that are hard to make sense of in an
>> automated fashion, like
> Err, no that's easier to make sense of in an automated fashion than it
> is to read, although re-arranging your example into a more human
> parsable version, it's perfectly easy to understand as well...
> 34 36 76
> In other words,
> tag1 = [ 34, 36, 76 ]
> tag1.tag2 = 35
> tag1.tag3 = hello
>> Such mixed content is fine fore (X)HTML documents, but imho should be
>> avoided if possible for serialisations that are to be read by machines.
> Why? I don't understand why you'd find the above ambiguous?
More information about the dm