Spectral Data Model V2.0 working draft

[Mark Cresitello-Dittmar]

On 10/17/2012 08:15 AM, Omar Laurino wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I agree with Markus. This escaped our internal review, but should be 
> easily fixed. I don't think I agree that we shouldn't use the term 
> namespace, but that's a utypes issue. For what the DM serialization is 
> concerned, the utypes syntax doesn't have anything to do with the XML 
> namespaces notation (true even if utypes were not fixed strings).
>
> Cheers,
>

I tend to agree as well..  much of that is just carried from the earlier 
models.
I do think there is interest and benefit in providing a place for the 
XSD.  It would
have to be in the topmost level uber-generic objects.. so putting it 
alongside/with
the Dataset.Datamodel  attribute makes sense.

As for using the term 'namespace', I don't have a problem with the term 
(obviously),
but also would be OK switching to something like 'model prefix'.. or 
whatever.


Mark