<div dir="ltr">Hi Mark and Markus,<br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 3:14 AM Mark Taylor <<a href="mailto:m.b.taylor@bristol.ac.uk">m.b.taylor@bristol.ac.uk</a>> wrote:</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
One thing not clear to me: is the intention to remove the document<br>
at <a href="http://www.ivoa.net/xml/VOSITables/VOSITables-v1.1.xsd" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.ivoa.net/xml/VOSITables/VOSITables-v1.1.xsd</a>,<br>
which should not have been there in the first place<br>
(since its content should be available from<br>
at <a href="http://www.ivoa.net/xml/VOSITables/VOSITables-v1.0.xsd" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.ivoa.net/xml/VOSITables/VOSITables-v1.0.xsd</a>).<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Yes, correct.</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
If so, then Markus's comment:<br>
<br>
On Wed, 29 Aug 2018, Markus Demleitner wrote:<br>
<br>
> No functional impact is expected since the artifacts in the schema<br>
> repository are not touched as such; this is essentially a<br>
> documentation change. Even if an implementor had chosen to copy <br>
> schema files from the standard document rather than the schema<br>
> repository, no impact is expected, as clients currently have no<br>
> reason to interpret version attributes in the schema files of<br>
> capabilities or availability.<br>
<br>
would not be true, and a possible impact might be that anybody<br>
(ill-advisedly) using the<br>
<a href="http://www.ivoa.net/xml/VOSITables/VOSITables-v1.1.xsd" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.ivoa.net/xml/VOSITables/VOSITables-v1.1.xsd</a> resource<br>
would see it disappear.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Okay, good point, though I think Markus was only referring to capabilities and availability so that point still stands still stands. If this sounds good, I will modify the impact section to say:</div><div><br></div><div>1. If an implementor had chosen to copy the VOSI availability and/or VOSI capabilities schema files from the document rather than the schema repository, no impact is expected, as clients currently have no reason to interpret version attributes in those schemas.</div><div><br></div><div>2. Any implementors that, through discovering the resource from the IVOA schema repository, refer to the v1.1 VOSI tables schema namespace URL must change that to be the v1.0 URL.</div><div><br></div><div>3. Since the content of the VOSITables schema does not change, implementors need not make any associated code changes.</div><div><br></div><div>So, GWS members, if you have implemented VOSITables 1.1, please take action if you fall into the scenario of point 2.</div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
One other thing: I corrected a spelling mistake (effects -> affects).<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Damn, got that one wrong again :)</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
Mark<br><br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Thanks for reading the erratum.</div><div><br></div><div>Brian </div></div></div>