<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">Markus,<div><br></div><div>I haven't taken the time to digest this fully, but this paragraph struck me.</div><div>You seem to be conflating the model and its annotation too directly.</div><div>The model is not repeating serialization information, but representing the concepts.</div><div>A physical quantity has these concepts</div><div> * it is continuous, or integral (datatype)</div><div> * it has units</div><div> * it has a value.</div><div>These are serialized in VOTable as a PARAM</div><div>The PARAM is annotated as a Quantity type.</div><div><br></div><div>I agree that it is important to know what the effect on serialization is.. that is why we have example files which clearly show these elements.</div><div>But the model is not tied to any serialization format. The fact that VOTable has a param which includes value, unit and type, does not mean</div><div>that the model should not also have something with those features. It means that at this fine-grain level, they align (which they should).</div><div><br></div><div>Also, the model is showing the type of the concept (eg RealQuantity has a floating point value, so is continuous). This is true whether the VOTable has the value serialized as a float (10.0), integer (10) or string ("10"). Any should be valid so long as it can be translated to a RealQuantity.</div><div><br></div><div>Mark</div><div><br></div><div>PS: the scope and requirements for the model are listed in the document.</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 9:38 AM Markus Demleitner <<a href="mailto:msdemlei@ari.uni-heidelberg.de">msdemlei@ari.uni-heidelberg.de</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><br>
Anyway, to get this away from abstract speculation: Are there actual<br>
use cases that would profit from repeating type/unit/value<br>
serialisation in the data model? If so, perhaps there are better,<br>
more layer-respecting solutions for them?<br><br>
</blockquote></div></div>