DAL/TAP Response

[Ray Plante]

Hi Keith,

Thanks for the nudge.  And just to show I'm not asleep, I'll say that
I'm not sure I would agree to your framing of the controversy over 
TAP. Consequently, I think it leads to an incomplete list of options.

On Thu, 5 Feb 2009, Keith Noddle wrote:
> (1) We adhere to the decisions of the IVOA and define a TAP standard that 
> includes only asynchronous ADQL-based querying. We follow that quickly with 
> the next revision of the TAP document that includes optional parametrised 
> querying. Separating them out will allow progress on each to be made.
>
> (2) We revisit the IVOA decision, turn it on its head and make parametrised 
> querying mandatory, define a standard that enshrines that and in a later 
> revision add an ADQL querying option.
>
> (3) We revisit the whole notion of TAP and accept two standards that define 
> Table Access: SimpleTAP that defines Parametrised querying and TAP that 
> defines ADQL based querying (actual names TBD). We bring both to the IVOA as 
> and when they are ready as independent standards. We then allow (recommend, 
> cajole) the Data Centres to choose which they implement - or more likely, 
> which they deploy based upon the off-the-shelf services the various VO 
> projects offer.

I feel quite certain that no one is suggesting 2 or 3.  For my own part 
and on behalf of my project, I've tried to make it quite clear that it has 
never been our position to attempt to change the agreement to "make 
parametrised querying mandatory".

In my view, the option that was left out was the one that was in progress:
(0) To create an integrated spec where ADQL is mandatory and parameterized 
query is optional.  This was the basic agreement from the IVOA meetings, 
yes?

We know WG discussions regularly slow down, and I think in this case of 
TAP, there's probably a bit of "let's wait and see what happens" going on, 
and apart from three hearty souls, we may be wondering where to begin.  I 
would suggest we develop a strawman list of outstanding unresolved and/or 
controversial issues.  As we write them down, some obvious alternatives 
could be offered that people can respond to.  I'd be happy to contribute 
to that list.

cheers,
Ray