illegal/unrecommended use of IVOA identifiers
roy at cacr.caltech.edu
Fri Nov 17 06:54:38 PST 2006
Following your logic, this means that VOEvents can also be registered
individually, rather than registering the server that handles them, as
Ray suggests. I understand that LSST will be putting out thousands of
event notices every night. Do you think the VO registry system will be
able to handle the load?
Another problem is inflexibility. Suppose a group wishes to experiment
with their own dialect of messages, and they want to change rapidly,
adding and deleting. In the official (Ray) scheme, they would have a
standalone message registry that may or may not be registered with the
VO registry. In your scheme, each message is added and deleted from the
entire global VO registry.
Of course it is much more convenient to have "everything in the
registry", it is a one-stop shop instead of a two-stage process. But
perhaps not always the best solution.......
John Taylor wrote
> a search of the registry reveals the ivo://..../loadVOTable message
> Ray Plante wrote:
>> Instead, I would recommend the approach that is to be used by the
>> VOSpace standard in which names are identified using a # suffix; e.g.,
More information about the registry