[Obscore1.1] WD comments

[Louys Mireille]

Hi Markus , hi all,

My understanding was that ObsCore can also be used by a SIAv2 protocol 
from a server that does not rely on ObsTAP , nor ADQL.
In this case it is useful to have a precise definition of time stamps.
my 2c,
Best wishes, Mireille.

Le 10/07/2015 12:55, Markus Demleitner a écrit :
> Mark,
>
> On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 03:49:32PM -0400, CresitelloDittmar, Mark wrote:
>>> way a validator could get me, as it has no way to figure out what I'm
>>> doing behind my VOTable facade.
>>>
>>>
>> I'm not sure I follow.  ObsCore:Table 7 is shows that the DB Table
> Ah well, I was trying to play devil's advocate -- if obscore says the
> dates must be stored/expressed/whatever in ISO 8601, and my DBMS
> doesn't use ISO 8601, then technically it wouldn't implement obscore.
>
> But:
>
>>> Anyway, after these considerations I'd propose to remove  all
>>> references to the storage format of dates, in particular in B.3.5 and
>>> B.4.5.
>>>
>>
>> This would be fine, so long as an implementor knows how to express
>> the adql:TIMESTAMP elements.  Maybe this is already covered from
>> the TAP document?.. Section 2.5:
>>
> -- right, that was my main point: TAP says how you're supposed to
> deliver timestamps (rightfully, that should be VOTable, but that's a
> minor detail), and therefore there's no need for obscore to say
> anything about that except that the datatype in ADQL databases is
> TIMESTAMP (which is not trivial); from there, the VOTable
> serialisation follows.
>
> What other systems that might some day be used to store obscore rows
> might do about those dates is not for us to define at this point, and
> it's not necessary to define it, either.
>
> Cheers,
>
>         Markus
>