SSA working draft (fwd)

[Randall Thompson]

Hi all,
    In starting to review version 0.97, I find several discrepancies
between the  metadata descriptions in sections 3.3.7-3.3.12,
and the examples listed in Appendix A and B, particularly in the
utype values. I would hope the examples could be corrected before
V1.0 and would include all the designated "mandatory" entries.
    I hope to have more comments soon.

Randy

Doug Tody wrote:

>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 21:27:28 -0600 (MDT)
>From: Doug Tody <dtody at nrao.edu>
>To: dal at ivoa.net
>Subject: SSA working draft
>
>Hi All -
>
>The SSA protocol and data model working draft documents have been
>updated.  The current versions can be found off the DAL WG Twiki page
>and at the following links:
>
>     http://www.aoc.nrao.edu/~dtody/ssa/ssa-v097.pdf
>     http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~jcm/vo/docs/spec98/spec98d.pdf
>
>Both of these have undergone significant revision since the IVOA Moscow
>meeting (the data model has been updated as well in the past several
>days and is now at V0.98 rev 4).  The protocol document is complete
>for the core queryData operation, including both query parameters
>and query response metadata (some UCDs still need to be determined,
>getCapabilities is not yet specified, and the examples at the end
>have not yet been updated).
>
>What we would like to do between now and December is 1) invite comment
>on the specification, and 2) proceed with the initial implementations
>following ADASS.  Both of these will activities will proceed in
>parallel.  The main interface including protocol and data model is now
>sufficiently complete and internally consistent to permit both of these
>activities to go foward.  A final update to the documents is planned
>once this is complete, after which we expect to promote the documents
>to preliminary recommendations, suitable for wider implementation.
>
>At this point quite a few implementations are planned, including
>both services and client applications, however we are not sure how
>many can go forward between now and December.  If you are planning
>an implementation in this period which can help verify the final
>1.0 interface, please let us know what you plan to do and on what
>schedule, so that we can track implementations, and better schedule
>the promotion to PR.
>
> 	- Doug
>  
>