Definitive version of the VOTable schema for web services

[Roy Williams]

Doug Tody wrote:
> I think the SOAP code should be treating the VOTable as either
> your case 1 or 2 (string or XML-formatted string), but not as 3
> (VOTable with schema).  Aside from asking for trouble from such
> a complex schema, and having redundant object verification, it
> is inefficient to carry schema validation this far.  The VOTable
> should be passed through either as a string or as an XML formatted
> string, probably the former, with the client using real class code
> (a VOTable library) to deal with it.  Aside from reducing complexity
> and improving efficiency, if I were writing an application I would
> prefer to discover object-related errors when I deal with the object,
> not at the level of the low level interface.
>   

Well put. The VOTable is passed as a string to its own handlers. I do 
not want to fetch <TD> elements and <FIELD> elements, I want to fetch 
rows and columns, column names, column descriptions, from a handler that 
knows these ideas.

I think the root of this problem is that the SOAP/WSDL thinks of schema 
and instance as separate files, whereas the table file means a 
combination of one schema and multiple instances.
> With that said: personally I do not think VOTable needs recursive
> structures.

I proposed in an IVOA interop some 2 or 3 years ago that VOTable be 
purged of RESOURCE and INFO, but it gained little traction.

Roy

-- 

California Institute of Technology
626 395 3670