Definitive version of the VOTable schema for web services

[Mark Taylor]

On Wed, 30 Jul 2008, Ray Plante wrote:

> On Tue, 29 Jul 2008, Matthew Graham wrote:
>> The code-binding approach, however, is supposed to be easier for end users 
>> (astronomers) who know (and want to know) nothing about constructing SOAP 
>> messages and WSDL.
>
> I definitely sympathize with this sentiment, and if it is possible to change 
> the VOTable spec to work better with code binders, I think we should do it.

Do we believe that astronomers are likely to get their hands dirty with 
web services even using such "easy" ways of working as code-binding tools?
Excluding the kinds of people who read these lists and turn up to 
IVOA meetings I don't know anyone who falls into this category.
But maybe I just don't get out much.

> That said, I'm actually not sure that the code binding approach is that much 
> easier when you consider the quality of the API (into a complex structure) 
> compared to your favorite, hand-hewn VOTable library.

Yes.  Putting these two points together I'm not sure that this line of
reasoning is itself a good reason for change (though I'm not necessarily
weighing in on either side of the do-we-change-VOTable-schema debate
overall).

Mark

-- 
Mark Taylor   Astronomical Programmer   Physics, Bristol University, UK
m.b.taylor at bris.ac.uk +44-117-928-8776 http://www.star.bris.ac.uk/~mbt/