Obscore 1.1 errata page

[Laurent Michel]

Markus,

To me, it's an important change in the model.
Those 2 fields are clearly defined (in the text) as being IVOA identifiers not URIs.
Modifying this is a bit more than fixing an UCD inconstancy, this changes the scope of these 2 identifiers (obs_publisher_did 
and publisher_id)
I would say it's another topic.

Laurent

> Hi Laurent,
> 
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 10:48:42AM +0100, Laurent Michel wrote:
>> 1) OK, I'll split the page in 2 errata
>> 2) Is your footnote [1] suggesting to go back from meta.ref.ivoid
>> to meta.curation;meta.ref.uri?
> 
> That would be my suggestion, yes.
> 
>        -- Markus
> 
>>> [1] I've put in meta.curation;meta.ref.uri instead of meta.ref.ivorn (or
>>> ivoid, whatever) -- for one, it's more specific, and for a second,
>>> in practice people put all kinds of things there, not just ivoids.
>>> That's particularly true for the pubDID, and I totally see that a DOI
>>> is at least as good as an ivoid.

-- 
jesuischarlie/Tunis/Paris/Bruxelles/Berlin

Laurent Michel
SSC XMM-Newton
Tél : +33 (0)3 68 85 24 37
Fax : +33 (0)3 )3 68 85 24 32
Université de Strasbourg <http://www.unistra.fr>
Observatoire Astronomique
11 Rue de l'Université
F - 67200 Strasbourg