RFC period started for Obscore 1.1

[Patrick Dowler]

I agree with this. Keep compat but do it right from here on.

Pat

On 14 June 2016 at 01:38, Markus Demleitner
<msdemlei at ari.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote:
> Dear DM,
>
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 09:04:57AM +0200, Laurent Michel wrote:
>> >>The RFC period for Obscore 1.1 is started. It will cover a 6 weeks period from
>> >>now until May 15th.
>
> Ahem.  Sorry that Registry hasn't put in their opinion yet.  I
> promise it's not going to take much longer.  However, there is one
> point I'd like to make here with my Registry chair hat on to see if
> fixing this would cause problems for anyone, and that's the standard
> identifier (sect. 5).
>
> The current standard says:
>
>   The standard identifier for the ObsCore model described here is
>   ivo://ivoa.net/std/ObsCore/v1.1.
>
> This is somewhat suboptimal, as it implies that for every ObsCore
> version there's going to be a separate StandardsRegExt record --
> remember, an ivoid is supposed to resolve in the Registry, and we in
> the Registry WG intend to be a bit stricter in this in the future.
>
> It is for this reason that Identifiers 2.0 recommends to have
> standard identifiers of the form
>
>   ivo://ivoa.net/std/<standard name>/<something>-<version>
>
> where <something> is a particular aspect of the standard; that's a
> good idea because many standards at some point needed several
> different concepts versioned.  For Obscore, this would mean we'd like
> the standard id to be
>
>   ivo://ivoa.net/std/ObsCore#table-1.1
>
> Sure, this will look a bit odd because we cannot fix the standard id
> for version 1.0, and so, further down on p. 27, it will have to say:
>
>   Since ObsCore-1.1 is a superset of 1.0, TAP services that support
>   ObsCore-1.1 also support ObsCore-1.0 and should include both
>   'dataModel' elements, e.g.:
>
>   <dataModel ivo-id="ivo://ivoa.net/std/ObsCore/v1.0">ObsCore-1.0</dataModel>
>   <dataModel ivo-id="ivo://ivoa.net/std/ObsCore#table-1.1">ObsCore-1.1</dataModel>
>
>   This will allow clients looking for ObsCore-1.0 to find and use...
>
> Not particularly pretty, but I think it's still better keeping
> churning out one registry record per version.
>
> So -- does anyone object to fixing this this late in the process?
>
> Cheers,
>
>            Markus



-- 
Patrick Dowler
Canadian Astronomy Data Centre
Victoria, BC, Canada