Q in STC (and other DM model components), Why not? (Was: Re: Charac Answer)

[Brian Thomas]

On Friday 02 September 2005 01:06 pm, Francois Bonnarel wrote:
> Brian had provided an STC schema version based on his Quantity schema,
> and we tried to reuse this fusion. There has been an oral discussion on that
> and also on the list in May (see this dm list archive for details).
>     The main problem with that attempt, was that this STC schema was not
> the "official" one.

	Right. And I would like to see some discussion on why we can't adopt
	the Q-based STC schema. I had been advised to wait until the official
	STC 1.0 release, and this has more or less happened, so I am back with
	this question/demand. 

	By adopting the Quantity into various component parts such as the STC,
	it makes the construction of other model components that rely on them 
	easier to build, and (more importantly) more consistent with one another.
	This consistency can be leveraged to more quickly build parsing code (
	which, yes, you need to do, regular XML-based data-binding is insufficient
	in most cases for scientific data. For example, I could easily parse the Q-
	based STC schema with my Quantity Java package; currently available at 
	http://www.data-model.net)

	Regards,

	=b.t.

-- 
--------------------------------------
|                                     
| Dr. Brian Thomas                    
|                                     
| Dept of Astronomy                   
| University of Maryland-College Park 
|
| Phone: (301) 405-2312               
| Fax: (301) 314-9067                 
|                                     
--------------------------------------