new TAP-1.1 WD released

[Mark Taylor]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2017, Patrick Dowler wrote:

> 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?

My guess is that most or at least many TAP 1.1 services will sit
on top of UWS 1.1, so I think it should at least mention that
in the case of a UWS 1.1-based service blocking calls are a
possibility.  The existing text "The client may have to check
the phase multiple times until the job finishes." seems to
suggest that polling is the only way to do it.

I'm not particularly advocating that TAP 1.1 should make UWS 1.1
a requirement - there are pros and cons.

Mark

--
Mark Taylor   Astronomical Programmer   Physics, Bristol University, UK
m.b.taylor at bris.ac.uk +44-117-9288776  http://www.star.bris.ac.uk/~mbt/