<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Yes, I believe I meant an XML serialization of an *instance* of the model.<div><br></div><div>-- Matthew</div><div><br><div><div>On May 10, 2016, at 3:38 PM, Gerard Lemson wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr">Hi<div>What is meant by item 2, "<span style="font-size:12.8px">An XML serialization of the DM".</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">The standard representation (serialization?) of a VO-DML data model is VO-DML/XML, i.e. XML. And that is the representation that can be validated (step 1?) using automated means, for example using XSLT scripts in the vo-dml/xslt folder on volute@gavo.</span><br></div><div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">If 2) is meant to imply an XML serialization of an *instance* of the model, that we can only do once we have a standard XML representation of instances of models. That does not yet exist. The original VO-URP framework does contain an automated XML Schema generator for its version of VO-DML, that has not yet been ported to VO-DML.</span></div></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">And of course t</span><span style="font-size:12.8px">he mapping document describes how one can describe instances serialized in VOTable, but that is a different standard.</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">For what it's worthy, I think that an "implementation of VO-DML" is a data model expressed using that language (in VO-DML/XML to be precise) and validated using software. The latter enforces that the language should allow automated validtion.</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">I think interoperable implementations of VO-DML are two or more valid models that are linked by "modelimport" relationships. I.e.one model "imports" the other(s) and uses types from the other as roles or super types in the definition of its own types. This is supported by the VODMLID/VODMLREF meachanism of the language.</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">Cheers</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px">Gerard</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px"> </span></div><div><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 9:04 AM, Matthew Graham <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mjg@cd3.caltech.edu" target="_blank">mjg@cd3.caltech.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi,<br>
<br>
We're trying to define specifically what would satisfy the reference implementation requirement for an IVOA Spec in the context of a data model. The proposal is that:<br>
<br>
(1) If the DM has been described using VO-DML it can be validated as valid VO-DML<br>
<br>
(2) An XML serialization of the DM can be validated<br>
<br>
so therefore is the combination of the two sufficient to demonstrate the validity and potential interoperability of the data model (which is the purpose of the reference implementations).<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
<br>
Matthew</blockquote></div><br></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>