regarding ALTTYPE [was RE: vo-dml in votable]

[Mark Taylor]

On Mon, 16 Mar 2015, gerard.lemson at gmail wrote:

> >       The important point is to keep the changes in VOTABLE as minimal and
> rare
> > as possible. I agree that the debate between "unique Types" / "multiple
> Types" is
> > still open and should be arbitrated by experience with VO-DML-aware
> clients
> > and prototypes.
> >       In these conditions and after considering all options I finally
> follow Mark's
> > proposal.
> >       This will allow some kind of experimental flexibility, freeze
> VOTABLE changes
> > rather soon and allow changes in VO-DML detailed syntax to be tuned in the
> > coming monthes/years.
> I am starting to come back a bit on what I thought Mark was proposing. I do
> not know for sure whether we can guarantee that any proposed VOTable change
> can be frozen until we have more progress on the mapping document itself. I
> think I can guarantee that all annotation will be confined to VODML elements
> on some VOTable types, but the precise details of this element may still
> have to change a bit. In particular, simply setting maxOccurs=unbounded on
> VODML/TYPE, though a useful step, may not be the end of the discussion.

If that's the case, I'm not sure I'm so keen on my proposal either.

--
Mark Taylor   Astronomical Programmer   Physics, Bristol University, UK
m.b.taylor at bris.ac.uk +44-117-9288776  http://www.star.bris.ac.uk/~mbt/