registry-updatable data

[KevinBenson]

Yes all sounds good,  as for the stampedidentifier area.  Yes you got what I
am saying.  I am thinking now maybe it simply is just the same identifier
that is in the ri:profile.  You might be right this is probably redundent; I
keep trying to find the idea of possibly only querying for recordCuration
such that an app/service might want to just get a listing of what
identifiers (recordCuration) that has verificationLevel < 2 set by
nvo.registry.

But maybe for now we always bring back Resources, unless somebody could see
a good idea of just having the recordCuration.

cheers,
Kevin

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registry at eso.org [mailto:owner-registry at eso.org]On Behalf Of
Ray Plante
Sent: 05 April 2005 20:38
To: registry at ivoa.net
Subject: RE: registry-updatable data


Hi Kevin,

On Tue, 5 Apr 2005, KevinBenson wrote:
> Some initial thoughts of what I am trying to work out:
> 1.) Do we want to return all <recordCuration> elements there maybe many
for
> one record, such as one from stsci, one from Astrogrid, one from JVO and
so
> on or do we just return the one recordCuration that came from the querying
> registry if there are any?

I think it is sufficient to return only the <recordCuration> set by the
registry returning the record.  If the client wants to know what some
other registry thinks of the record, it can query that other registry
itself.

> 3.) What is the unique id/identifier on recordCuration? Presumably a
> possible concat of what I called the stamped identifier and the curated
> registry part of the identifier would work good, or we just make the user
> make up another set of idents (but I think it might be easier to automate
> it).  The <stampedidentifier> as you say is the ivoa identifier, but
wanted
> to make sure it got across of what the identifier was that was curated
from
> a particular registry.  Hence we need to put an identifier on our
> <recordCuration> elements that way we don't need to do any kind of mapping
> with ri:profile.

So if I understand you correctly, <stampedidentifier> identifies the
resource that the <recordCuration> refers to, yes?  If so, this identifier
seems unnecessary.  The association of <recordCuration>
with a particular <profile> is implied by the <resourceRecord> element
that wraps them both together.  There is no ambiguity.

Or am I misunderstanding something?

> 4.) Final thought would a lot of apps or services in the beginning might
not
> want this recordCuration, but not sure how to make it optional unless we
add
> some kind of boolean to our interface methods.

You could say the same thing about <contact>, <referenceURL>, or any of
the VOResource metadata.  Apps get a full description regardless of what
they are interested in.  Luckily, since it's XML, it's easy to pull out
the information you want and throw the rest away.

cheers,
Ray