<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="overflow-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;"><div>Mark,</div><div><br></div><div>Honestly, I haven't considered using the VOTable mime type, but that might work.</div><div><br></div><div>My motivation for suggesting this is twofold:</div><div>1- An annotated VOTable is a VOTable that contains an XML block that obeys its own schema. In other words, it is something different from a regular VOTable. So having a specific mime type makes sense.</div><div>2- More pragmatically, having a specific mime type allows clients to request annotated data via the &FORMAT TAP parameter as they could for any other format (JSON...).</div><div>
<meta charset="UTF-8"><div dir="auto" style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0); letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none; word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;"><div dir="auto" style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0); letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none; word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;"><div><br></div><div>Laurent</div></div></div>
</div>
<div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div>On 5 Dec 2024, at 16:49, Mark Taylor <m.b.taylor@bristol.ac.uk> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div><div>Laurent,<br><br>I don't necessarily disagree with these suggestions, but another<br>alternative would just be to use a standard VOTable MIME type<br>on its own (application/x-votable+xml). MIME types are a fairly<br>blunt instrument and don't usally say much about the content of<br>resources, just rather basic information about the format.<br><br>Can you say something about why it's useful to have the fact of<br>MIVOT/MANGO annotation declared in the the MIME type, e.g. what<br>client behaviour would benefit from it?<br><br>Thanks<br><br>Mark<br><br>On Thu, 5 Dec 2024, Laurent Michel via apps wrote:<br><br><blockquote type="cite">Dear groups<br><br>At the last interop, apps session, I showed a TAP service that annotates data with MIVOT, as long as you use <br> FORMAT=application/mango.<br><br>I was rightly told that this was probably the worst choice I could have made, even for a simple demonstrator.<br><br>The question now is to construct a mime type, compatible with the RFCs and expressing the fact that the response to the request is a VOTable, whose data is mapped onto a model using the MIVOT syntax.<br><br>I think the right solution is to use the parameters as defined in rfc2045<br><br>There are two options:<br><br>1- say the data is annotated with MIVOT and let the client find out which model it is.<br><br> application/x-votable+xml;mapping=mivot<br><br>2- say the data is mapped to the MANGO model with MIVOT<br><br> application/x-votable+xml;mivot=mango<br><br>This second solution highlights a particular model, but it may make sense for our use cases.<br><br>Any suggestions or comments?<br><br>All the best, <br><br>Laurent<br></blockquote><br>--<br>Mark Taylor Astronomical Programmer Physics, Bristol University, UK<br>m.b.taylor@bristol.ac.uk https://www.star.bristol.ac.uk/mbt/<br></div></div></blockquote></div><br></body></html>