[vodml] EnumLiterals and vodml-id

[Arnold Rots]

Just for the record, I have no enumerations that violate the rules.
And I see no reason to need whitespace characters; CamelCase works just
fine.

One clarification, though: are numerals allowed in the strings? (not that I
have any)

Cheers,

  - Arnold

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arnold H. Rots                                          Chandra X-ray
Science Center
Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory                   tel:  +1 617 496
7701
60 Garden Street, MS 67                                      fax:  +1 617
495 7356
Cambridge, MA 02138
arots at cfa.harvard.edu
USA
http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~arots/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 11:32 AM, <gerard.lemson at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Mark
> >
> > Gerard.. this was your own suggestion :)
> >
> Yes, but I also mentioned my preferred alternative, which is leaving
> things as they are *including* the constraint on the EnumLiteral names.
>
> >
> > I'm not sure Marcus was voting against having a label as much as not
> sure where
> > it would be used.  The pattern of having an enumeration literal with a
> code and
> > label seems pretty common and fits what we are talking about.  The
> description
> > field is not appropriate as that is more than just an alternate
> representation of
> > the enum literal name.
> >
> My position comes from that fact that I see no useful use case for
> introducing an alternative label/title/.... At least not in VO-DML.
> My motivation was that Enumerations are generally used as values for
> attributes that put the attribute's owning type instances in a certain
> category. And a simple list of values [1,2,3,..., N] might work perfectly,
> assuming a proper description is provided.
> Enumerations are often used as a poor man's solution where an alternative
> choice would be to create a full type hierarchy representing those
> categories.
> So if you think that we need human readable values, do you propose the
> same for Type names? And why would that be useful?
> And if you think we need human readable titles/labels, why for example is
> simple CamelCase not good enough?
>
> >
> > For example, the SpectralBandType  (again)
> >
> >     name    label          description
> >
> >    OPTICAL  Optical      "0.3 microns <= wavelength <= 1 micron"
> >
> >    UV       UltraViolet  "100 Angstrom <= wavelength <= 3000 Angstrom"
> >
> >    XRAY     X-ray        "0.1 Angstrom <= wavelength <= 100 Angstrom"
> >
> >
> > satisfies everyone's needs, so seems like a very reasonable approach.
> >
> Are you saying that
>
>     name    description
>    Optical      "0.3 microns <= wavelength <= 1 micron"
>    UltraViolet  "100 Angstrom <= wavelength <= 3000 Angstrom"
>    XRay        "0.1 Angstrom <= wavelength <= 100 Angstrom"
>
> does not satisfy everybody's needs? Who are these people and coders that
> would need the label to be able to understand how to map their data to the
> common model? Why all-caps for enumliteral names? Why use a grammar
> suitable for English phrases? Don't say that this is for human readable
> UIs, for than all non-English speakers might well be offended.
>
> >
> > Remember that this exercise is not just to write models conforming to
> VO-DML,
> > but also to exercise VO-DML and its ability to serve the modeling.
> >
> Indeed, but I would also hope that these examples and the discussions help
> to make people realize the semantics of VO-DML concepts and its supposed
> usage.
> Which is primarily annotation of data sets for use by software. In general
> we will encounter instance of VO-DML concepts (types etc) in circumstances
> that cannot be interpreted as a "faithful", 1-1 representation. It is up to
> "annotators" to identify their representations with those in a model. For
> this they will have to understand the local concept and the VO-DML version
> of it. I cannot believe that it would help them greatly to have a label in
> vernacular English.
> I would also refer to Omar's presentation in Heidelberg about robots and
> utypes, emphasizing that human readability is *not* the main requirement of
> our work (apart obviously from documentation/descriptions.
>
> Cheers
>
> Gerard
>
> >
> > Mark
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 5:34 PM, <gerard.lemson at gmail.com
> > <mailto:gerard.lemson at gmail.com> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >       HI Mark
> >
> >       > -----Original Message-----
> >
> >
> >       I agree with Markus' opinion, which was also my favorite, that we
> do
> > not need a human readable label|title|fullName. The 'description'
> attribute can
> > take care of the explanation. The name is the one to be used in the
> > computational context where one may wish to use the data model. To me the
> > fact that other standards did not use this is not so important as those
> were not
> > written in VO-DML.
> >
> >
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.ivoa.net/pipermail/dm/attachments/20160112/419abf08/attachment-0001.html>