UWS draft comments

[Mark Taylor]

Hi Paul et al.

I have some minor comments about the current unpublished UWS 1.1 draft.

I have already fixed a small number of tiny typos in volute (r2750).

Other items:

sec 2.1.3:
   Diagram lacks ARCHIVED phase

sec 2.2 (2.2.2?):
   I would like clarification of whether whitespace is permitted
   in text/plain REST endpoints, e.g. {jobs}/(job-id)/phase -
   see my email on the grid list:
   http://mail.ivoa.net/pipermail/grid/2014-September/002648.html
   As far as current practice goes (which you may or may not wish
   to endorse), my experience is that most services return exactly
   the required string, but the ESAC GACS service appends \r\n to phase.

sec 2.2.1:
   last cell in table says "an appropriate identifier as discussed in
   in section 3".  It's not really discussed in section 3 (though it
   would be nice if it was).

sec 2.2.1.1:
   "UWS 1.1 introduces blocking behaviour where the server may not
    return the result of a request immediately (i.e. block) ..."
   A bit ambiguous.  Reword "... the server may defer returning the
   result of a request (i.e. block) ..." ?

   "A client that is UWS1.1 compliant should also be aware that
    it will receive immediate responses if it attempts to perform
    this operation on a UWS 1.0 server."
   - add a note here about how the client can determine server version?
   Or don't we know yet?  In any case this functionality is unusable
   unless the client can reliably determine that it is talking to a
   1.1 UWS service.

sec 2.2.2.1:
   "The list may be empty if the UWS is idle."  Reword?  Idle sounds
   like it means it's not running any jobs currently, not that it has
   no records of any.

Mark

--
Mark Taylor   Astronomical Programmer   Physics, Bristol University, UK
m.b.taylor at bris.ac.uk +44-117-9288776  http://www.star.bris.ac.uk/~mbt/