Paul Harrison wrote:
> On 23.11.2006, at 05:16, Matthew Graham wrote:
>
>> 2. Views
>> This needs to be renamed to what it actually is, i.e. format(s), sincexx
>> the current name is universally confusing.
>
> yes! - but I think it is really two concepts - on import it is just a
> statement of the format of the data - on export it is a request to
> convert the data to a format. The whole transfer object in the WSDL
> should reflect this difference by not using the same data structure
> for requests and returned information, as this is also confusing IMHO
> as the distinction is lost between the statements
> "this data is in format x"
> "convert this data to format y"
I agree.
These are two separate things, and 'view' on its own does not work for
either.
I started to write a reply to this ... but it kind of grew, so I
converted it into a wiki page instead.
http://wiki.astrogrid.org/bin/view/Astrogrid/VoSpace20061127
Summary :
In an import to VOSpace, all you want to say is "I want to send a FITS
image".
Every time I explain the current system to people, they look blank when
I describe "selecting which view to import".
It isn't clear what it actually means - even to us.
In the export from VOSpace, we have mangled three concepts into one
element, and it doesn't work properly.
Describing the available outputs requires three separate things
Anyway ... see what you think.
Thanks,
Dave
Received on 2006-11-27Z14:49:00