s_region problem

Mon Dec 18 17:40:24 CET 2017

Hi Alberto, all,

Also, at the ESDC, we share the statements from Alberto. If we want to 
have polymorphic ways to describe
the same kind of entities (like geometry) we have to ensure that the 
applications are prepared for them and
we have to justify why we are moving away from the previous defacto 
standard.

In case we want to officially standardize STC-S or a similar string 
format, we also consider that reusing a
format like "Well-known_text" could be an option to prevent 
inconsistencies and simplify implementations.

Cheers,
Jesus

On 18/12/17 17:20, Baptiste Cecconi wrote:
> Hi Alberto,
>
> in spite of my delayed answer, I fully agree with your statements (all 
> of them, include your extra point).
>
> Baptiste
>
> Le 7 déc. 2017 à 12:14, alberto micol <amicol.ivoa at googlemail.com 
> <mailto:amicol.ivoa at googlemail.com>> a écrit :
>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> I think that this topic has the potential for a very bad impact on 
>> the way the astronomical community perceives the VO.
>>
>> 1.- The clients/tools are the face of the VO, they are what the 
>> astronomical community sees of the VO.
>> Exposing these new polygon format when the clients/tools are not yet 
>> in the position of digesting it
>> seems not a good way forward.
>> We are losing our face with the astronomical community by acting this 
>> way.
>> Coordination with the developers of tools/clients is of paramount 
>> importance.
>> This to me is an important lesson learned.
>>
>> 2.- The ObsTAP promise was and still is:
>> - one and the same query to all data centres,
>> - one and the same answer (names, formats, units) from all of them
>> Easy.
>> This is now an unfulfilled promise.
>>
>> 3.- A multiplication of formats makes it very hard to interoperate.
>> Some clients will support all new formats, some will only support one 
>> of them;
>> as a consequence, data providers will have to generate output 
>> containing all formats
>> so to guarantee maximum flexibility to their users. Complexity is 
>> nobody’s friend.
>>
>> 4.- At ESO, complementing what Theresa said, there was quite some 
>> effort in supporting STC-S
>> as output format from our SQLServer database. We did that because 
>> this is required by ObsCore,
>> and because this is what the clients understand. Blood went into our 
>> design and implementations:
>> STC-S is formally not an approved standard? It is a de-facto 
>> standard, and that should be respected.
>>
>> Sorry all, I might sound a bit hard on all this… apologies but I see 
>> a lot at stake here.
>>
>> Conclusions:
>> I plea the data centres that already implemented the change in 
>> Obscore/SSA/SIA/etc
>> to retract it asap to avoid this confusion, until the impasse
>> --from the user's point of view-- is resolved.
>>
>> Alberto
>>
>> PS: One extra point: if you really really really want to move away 
>> from STC-S,
>> then why re-inventing the wheel and coming up with yet a new format?
>> Please consider to use the well-established text markup language 
>> called Well-Known Text (WKT),
>> already supported by many DBMSes including postgres, SQLServer,
>> Oracle, mysql, and many others;
>> see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Well-known_text (and its RDBMS 
>> section).
>> Such choice would greatly simplify the adoption of the new standard 
>> by the data centres:
>> there would be no need to develop special functions to handle VO-made 
>> formats.
>> Still, clients would have to implement it, but at least the backend 
>> job would be already done.
>>
>>
>>> On 24 Nov 2017, at 12:26, Pierre Fernique 
>>> <Pierre.Fernique at astro.unistra.fr 
>>> <mailto:Pierre.Fernique at astro.unistra.fr>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Dear DAL and Apps members,
>>>
>>> It seems that we have a problem concerning the *s**_region* usage.
>>>
>>> Recently, we discover that some data providers have changed their 
>>> syntax, moving from the regular STC-S string to a new one which 
>>> seems to be an array of doubles, alternating long and lat. Both 
>>> Aladin V10 and Aladin Lite fail to manage a such new syntax, and we 
>>> had complaints from final users which do no longer see the FoV of 
>>> their observations.
>>>
>>> After investigating about this unexpected evolution, it appears that 
>>> this new syntax is generated by some versions of DaCHS testing 
>>> TAP1.1 future possible recommendation.
>>>
>>> So, I have several questions for TAP 1.1 authors and DAL members :
>>>
>>>  1. Is is really true that STC-S s_region should be removed from
>>>     VOTable results ? Personally, I did not see this consequence in
>>>     the TAP 1.1 document. or ?
>>>  2. And if yes : is it only in TAP ? or also in SIA2 or SSA ?
>>>  3. How the client can know the logic (lon/lat or lat/lon,
>>>     counter-clock or anti-counterclock, ...), the frame and other
>>>     coordinate parameters for such array of double ?
>>>  4. How providers who already generated complex s_region will do now
>>>     ? (for instance ESO)
>>>  5. How we will manage the transition period ?
>>>
>>> Best regards
>>> Pierre Fernique
>>>
>>>
>>

-- 
Jesus Salgado
ESA Astronomy Archives Technical Lead
QUASAR Science Resources for European Space Agency (ESA)

ESAC Science Data Centre (ESDC), SCI-OPD
Data and Engineering Division, SCI-OP
Operations Department, Directorate of Science
European Space Astronomy Centre (ESAC)
European Space Agency (ESA)

ESAC - ESA Science Astronomy Centre
Camino Bajo del Castillo s/n
Urb. Villafranca del Castillo
28692 Villanueva de la Canada - Madrid        Tel: +34 91 813 12 71
SPAIN                                         Fax: +34 91 813 13 08
-------------------------------------------------------------------

This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee or addressees only.
The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in whole or in part) of its
content is not permitted.
If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system.
Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the sender.

Please consider the environment before printing this email.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.ivoa.net/pipermail/apps/attachments/20171218/eff24fc7/attachment.html>