Registry discussion

[Tony Linde]

Hi Bob,

I agree that is is important that we get published papers to be able to
reference original data, queries, workflows and both intermediate and final
results if necessary. We've been having the same discussion on AstroGrid
recently and I'm pleased to see that someone is tackling it. 

That said, I think the naming issue is probably more complex and related to
issues about provenance, curation etc. If we can just get to the stage where
we agree a single standard for naming resources, I think it'll be a major
step forward. We can then work out the other issues with the publishing
people.

Maybe we need a publishing WG!!

Cheers,
Tony. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-registry at eso.org [mailto:owner-registry at eso.org] 
> On Behalf Of Robert Hanisch
> Sent: 15 September 2003 18:10
> To: registry at ivoa.net
> Subject: Re: Registry discussion
> 
> 
> > > > ** Compatibility with ADEC is the most important new 
> thing in the 
> > > > registry discussion. We should concentrate on that.
> > >
> > > This has popped up in the last week and suddenly it is the most
> iumportant
> > > thing in the VO world. Why?
> >
> > The reason we do research is to get journal publications. Once you 
> > have published to VO, it would be good if journal 
> publication (ADEC) 
> > is straightforward. I would like for the systems to be 
> joined -- that 
> > way the journals would cite VO identifiers. I would like for 
> > publication to happen in stages: a personal digital library, then 
> > sharing with a group, then public, then peer-reviewed.
> 
> For those who may not be familiar with ADEC (the Astrophysics 
> Data centers Executive Committee), which is the organization 
> of NASA data centers, let me try to shed some light on this.  
> The NASA data centers began an initiative a while ago to try 
> to find a way to support links from papers in the published 
> literature to the datasets upon which they are based.  (The 
> CDS has initiated a similar kind of facility with A&A, where 
> object names in papers are linked to their SIMBAD entries.)  
> The ADS (Astrophysics Data System) is a member of ADEC, and 
> ADEC took the initiative to try to develop this interlinking 
> system with the AAS journals (ApJ and AJ).  The NASA data 
> centers are also members of the US NVO project.  So, we are 
> all one big
> (happy) family!
> 
> Our original white papers on the VO included the idea that 
> the published literature is an integral component of the VO.  
> Published papers are just another sort of data -- albeit 
> highly processed and selective.  Many of the tables published 
> in the literature are ultimately ingested into services like 
> Vizier and NED, and thus are also the stuff of which the VO 
> is made. As Roy W. has noted recently, there is really a 
> continuum from raw data -- 
> pixels on a detector -- to the peer-reviewed literature.
> 
> So the reason that the means by which we link peer-reviewed 
> papers to their underlying datasets is important is because 
> it is really the same issue as persistent identifers in 
> resource registries.  (It is analogous to the bibcode or the 
> DOI, both of which are identifiers that exist outside of a 
> particular IP domain name.)  It would be unfortunate if we 
> needed different mechanisms or required totally different 
> syntaxes and parsing schemes to handle these two cases.
> 
> Bob
>