schema_index in TAP_SCHEMA.schemas?

[Mark Taylor]

I've got no objection to adding schema_index as suggested.

However, FWIW, I *probably* would not plan to make use of either
schema_index or table_index if present in the TOPCAT TAP GUI.
column_index is very useful, since the service (via the result of
SELECT * queries) defines a definite ordering for columns which
is otherwise not visible from TAP_SCHEMA.  But my feeling up till
now is that for schema and table lists, users are better served
in general by an alphabetic ordering scheme.

Mark

On Mon, 27 Mar 2017, Marco Molinaro wrote:

> Hi Walter, hi everybody,
> I think it depends on a "there was no requirement for it", so, it may be
> seen as a sort of an oversight.
> 
> Probably it s related to the fact that TAP content and VOSI tables are
> more tableset prone than really [catalog].schema.table.
> 
> I'm in favor of adding the schema_index.
> 
> Cheers,
>      Marco
> 
> 
> 2017-03-26 0:09 GMT+01:00 Walter Landry <wlandry at caltech.edu>:
> > Hi Everyone,
> >
> > The current working draft for TAP 1.1 enhances the TAP_SCHEMA tables
> > to include
> >
> >   TAP_SCHEMA.tables.table_index
> >   TAP_SCHEMA.columns.column_index
> >
> > That is great, but there is no corresponding
> >
> >   TAP_SCHEMA.schemas.schema_index
> >
> > Was that intentional or an oversight?  Here at IRSA, we split the
> > schemas by mission and we like to order them by what we consider
> > important (e.g. first WISE, then Spitzer, then 2MASS).
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Walter Landry
> 

--
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/