roadmap

[Tony Linde]

> Why to wait for the full implementation when a pragmatic 
> step-by-step approach will help everybody (users, data 
> provider, and even registry developers)?

I'm not suggesting we spend the next two years doing nothing but talking.
The roadmap shows extensive development and testing of the schema.

> Before getting to the most sophisticated registry, which can 
> automatically bind to and invoke services, ...

That's why I asked the question. If no-one else in the world wants to run
any of the services we are registering then maybe AstroGrid has to create
the standards and then hand them over to IVOA, but the AstroGrid project is
doing this NOW. Our goal is that in a workflow you can invoke data services
and tools and string the output from one to the input of another. To do
this, the registry must return the necessary information (either from its
own store or by getting metadata from the individual services) to the
workflow component.

Cheers,
Tony. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alberto Micol [mailto:Alberto.Micol at eso.org] 
> Sent: 10 March 2004 10:58
> To: Tony Linde
> Cc: registry at ivoa.net
> Subject: Re: roadmap
> 
> >
> >
> >And if all we use the registry for is to list datasets and their web 
> >address then we might as well just list them all on a web page. The 
> >metadata associated with datasets, tools etc must be rich enough to 
> >allow
> >*applications* to do real work with them. 
> >
> 
> >Has the NVO project (or anyone else) built or prototyped any way in 
> >which users can submit a registry query (in whatever form) 
> and have the 
> >resultant services (even if only data services) 
> automatically invoked?
> >
> Before getting to the most sophisticated registry, which can 
> automatically bind to and invoke services, I would claim that 
> it would be nice and useful to be able to query the registry 
> just to know which services/datasets/instrumets exist that 
> can be useful to me as an end-user.
> 
>  >"Listing them all on a web page"
> This is not what the registry does, the registry knows much 
> more in terms of metadata and can already answer 
> sophisticated queries like, which instrument can I use to 
> photometrically measure  globular stars in nearby galaxies ?
> 
> That implies knowledge on the field of view of the instrument 
> and on the
> resolution:
> FOV big enough to embrace the entire galaxy, and pixel scale 
> small enough to resolve the globular clusters.
> Furthermore the distance of the nearby galaxy is important to 
> determine adaptively such parameters, hence a service that 
> knows about distances of nearby galaxy is also to be found by 
> the registry.
> 
> After all, if the registry cannot do this, then it won't be 
> able to do the most complex thing either.
> (as if the example I gave is not complex enough ...:-)
> 
> Why to wait for the full implementation when a pragmatic 
> step-by-step approach will help everybody (users, data 
> provider, and even registry developers)?
> 
> >I know that this seems like a long time but the fact is that 
> standards 
> >which are widely agreed and which have been proved to work 
> do take many 
> >years to develop.
> >
> On the other hand, if you allow me the joke, the fact that it 
> will take long time does not prove that it will work :-))) A 
> pragmatic approach will remove such risk.
> 
> Alberto
> 
>