VOResource v0.10

[Ray Plante]

On Tue, 22 Jun 2004, Roy Williams wrote:
> Question 1: So I publish this to some registry through forms. The forms ask
> me if there are other parameters and I describe these (apple has the
> description, dtaatype, ucd, etc). The end result is a piece of XML that
> describes MY special cone search with MY special parameters. Something like
> what you write below. Is that right?

Yes.

> Question 2: Why are the standard parameters (RA, Dec, SR) mixed up with my
> personal paramters (apple, banana)? Has there been a thought of inheritance?
> What would seem much better would be to say "I have a standard Cone Search
> pus these extra parameters", rather than repeateing the standard parameters
> every time.

We could consider this.  (ConeSearch.xsd is a working draft--alternate 
suggested renditions are welcome.)  

That said, the current model does have the advantage one does not need to 
recognize the resource as a ConeSearch to figure out how to call it.  For 
example, a smart GUI or workflow engine can generate an interface on the 
fly which includes all the possible inputs.  Nevertheless, it would be an 
improvement if we could mark which parameters are required.  

Another advantage is that the documentation for the required parameters 
could differ from instance to instance.  (In a previous 
version where this info was encoded as VOTable's PARAM elements, it was 
possible to also include supported range constraints which also could vary 
from instance to instance.)

> Question 3: Is there an intention to define which parameters are necessary?
> Suppose apple and banana are optional parameters? Suppose there must be at
> least one of these? Does the registry record need to know this?

Yes, this would be an improvement, but it is not possible now.  

Any suggestions on how to encode your particular case?

cheers,
Ray