TAP RFC [MTIME]

[Francois Ochsenbein]

Besides "main", "narrow", "principal", "basic", "standard",
there could be another one: "important". My personal preference
would be "principal".

The categorisation of columns is a piece of metadata which 
is important in many circumstances, especially nowadays that
you find tables with several hundred columns. And replacing
this categorisation of columns by views would mean that we
have to describe the views and their relation with the 
underlying tables somewhere in the TAP schema, which would
mean more developments and more delays. 

--Francois

>
>On Thu, 17 Sep 2009, Tom McGlynn wrote:
>
>> Doug Tody wrote:
>>> On Thu, 17 Sep 2009, Patrick Dowler wrote:
>>>
>>>> My vote is to keep the concept of primary column(s), but rename it so it
>>>> is
>>>> not a pain to implement.
>>>
>>> My vote as well.  What do we want to call it then?  Various alternatives
>>> might be "main", "narrow", "principal".
>>>
>>>  	- Doug
>>>
>> At the HEASARC our term is 'standard', as in 'get the standard
>> columns in the query'.  I don't care what it is called so long
>> as we have the feature.
>
>"standard" is not bad but would conflict with "std" which is already
>part of the metadata (inherited from the registry metadata although
>pretty confusing for ordinary data tables).  Another possibility
>which has been suggested is "basic".
>
>As Tom says I don't think anyone really cares what we call it, but
>we need it.
>
> 	- Doug
=======================================================================
Francois Ochsenbein    ------   Observatoire Astronomique de Strasbourg
   11, rue de l'Universite 67000 STRASBOURG  Phone: +33-(0)368 85 24 29
Email: francois at astro.u-strasbg.fr (France)    Fax: +33-(0)368 85 24 17
=======================================================================