new TAP-1.1 WD released

[Patrick Dowler]

I am currently fixing up the draft with the things mentioned in this
thread. Most are done, except a couple that may be more substantial
than we want:

1. Mark Taylor's comment about a sentence in section 4: I can't
actually figure out what I was trying to refer to there (probably the
limited table name syntax allowed in UPLOAD), but it seems like this
was limiting allowed table and column names more than ADQL. I can't
find any notes that we decided to do that and it doesn't seem likely
so I am inclined to justb remove that sentence/paragraph. Comments?

2. Mark also suggested that we mention the blocking get from UWS-1.1
as an alternative to polling in the section with examples. Right now
UWS is loosely coupled and someone could implement TAP-1.1 with
UWS-1.0 or later ... Do we want that or do we want to reference and
require UWS-1.1 or later?

Pat

On 21 August 2017 at 16:39, Patrick Dowler <pdowler.cadc at gmail.com> wrote:
> I guess I was a little overzealous when writing that section. What I
> was thinking is that the datatype="char" size="32" (eg) one would use
> in a TAP-1.1 service cannot convey the variable length, which is why I
> added "or variable-length value".... I guess it would be OK if such a
> thing was described as datatype="char" size="32" arraysize="32*" (in
> the tap_schema and votable) and the variable-ness is only conveyed in
> the arraysize. [will fix]
>
> Pat
>
> On 2 August 2017 at 05:41, Grégory Mantelet
> <gmantele at ari.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote:
>> Hi DAL,
>>
>> About the TAP-1.1 WD (2017-07-07), I think there is a mistake about the
>> description of the deprecated column "size" (of TAP_SCHEMA.columns).
>>
>> In TAP 1.0:
>>
>> The “size” gives the length of variable length datatypes, for example
>> varchar(256); this size does not map to the VOTable arraysize attribute when
>> the
>> latter specifies the size and shape of a multi-dimensional array.
>>
>> But in this TAP 1.1 WD:
>>
>> The "size" column is retained for backwards compatibil-
>> ity to TAP-1.0 and must contain the integer value equivalent to arraysize
>> when possible and must be null if arraysize represents a multi-dimensional
>> or variable-length value.
>>
>> I totally agree about the fact that "size" should be NULL when the column
>> values are multi-dimensional arrays.
>> But I do not agree that "size" no longer represents the length of a
>> variable-length values (i.e. varchar, varbinary, char and binary).
>> It does fit with the TAP 1.0 description anymore. It may also confuse
>> users/clients when reading old (i.e. TAP-1.0) and new (i.e. TAP-1.1)
>> services.
>>
>> Is it normal? Or should it be fixed?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Grégory
>
>
>
> --
> Patrick Dowler
> Canadian Astronomy Data Centre
> Victoria, BC, Canada



-- 
Patrick Dowler
Canadian Astronomy Data Centre
Victoria, BC, Canada