Entangled Models [Was: MCT - model document delivery.]

[CresitelloDittmar, Mark]

Markus,

Your arguments always seem to boil down to how it will look/work when
annotated in a VOTable.
The models serve a broader audience than that.

To define isolated models, and then tell providers that
  * If you annotate model A, you must also annotate to models B and C
 is
  * impossible to validate that you have a usable instance of A.
  * not going to facilitate interoperability very well

But more importantly, the isolated model approach, especially where
Coords/Meas is concerned, goes against the expressed goal/direction that
the data model working group has been working toward for over 10 years.

   IVOA Architecture Document:
<http://www.ivoa.net/documents/Notes/IVOAArchitecture/20101123/IVOAArchitecture-1.0-20101123.pdf>
(2010) - Section 6
   "Some of the VO Data Models are specific to a type of data collection
(e.g. Spectrum DM, SSLDM, ObsCoreDM, ObsProvDM, PhotDM, SimDM), while
others (e.g. *STC,* Units, Utypes, CharDM)* are more foundational and are
components of the more specific Data Models*. In general, each Data Model
can be considered as a building block which can be referred from some other
Data Models."

and reflected in the working group twiki
<https://wiki.ivoa.net/twiki/bin/view/IVOA/IvoaDataModel#Standards_and_Documents>
model
framework diagram since 2011 (I checked the history).

So, in my opinion, this whole discussion is rather moot, unless the TCG has
decided to abandon this direction and the work done toward realizing it, to
adopt a different approach.
I say TCG because the models support the other groups.. and so affects them
as well.
Given this, I will try to refrain from further contributions to this
thread.. unless I'm told that we are, in fact, seriously considering a
change in approach.

Mark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.ivoa.net/pipermail/dm/attachments/20200930/b36a729d/attachment.html>