Coords/Measurement model RFC comment response

[CresitelloDittmar, Mark]

Laurent/All,

I agree with your suggestions..
  + I will add a link to the mail thread on the Coords/Meas RFC pages as
response to the comments
  + the new models should go through a new review period, as you suggest.
     o I have 1 more pass to do on the Coords model document today
     o then some integration/thread assessment on Transform to do with
David, so he can make progress on his implementation
     o then back to Meas documentation

Will let you know when everything is settled down for the next RFC period.

Mark


On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 4:59 AM Laurent MICHEL <
laurent.michel at astro.unistra.fr> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> Thank you Mark for this RFC answser.
>
> - The new design of the space coordinates with classes better matching
> entities usually used by astronmers, is a big improvement.
>
> - It is very valuable for the model to clearly state its limitations
> (error modeling, use cases) in the spec.
>
> - I agree with you that the model must be validated against real data
> but that validation must not be bind to one specific annotation mechanism.
>
> I propose to put a link to your message in the RFC pages instead of
> copying your anwsers one by one, which would be a waste of time.
>
> As you are proposing significant changes in the model design (I speak
> for both Meas and Coord), I think we have to formally extend the RFC
> cycle on a new Wiki page with document pointers and data samples fitting
> the new model features.
> Let me know whether you agree or not.
>
> Laurent
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.ivoa.net/pipermail/dm/attachments/20200302/82652137/attachment.html>