VOTable session @ Interop.Moscow
pdidelon at cea.fr
Thu Sep 21 05:44:24 PDT 2006
a comment on ID attribute,
Mark Taylor wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Sep 2006, Francois Ochsenbein wrote:
>>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
> 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?
More information about the votable