ownedAuthority element

[Gretchen Greene]

Yes I was thinking about this Matthew.

With the relational backend,  it's discretionary how to 
ingest the schema unlike the XML stores.  I thought too the 
idea behind the Full Registry was that it was Fully 
Searchable which meant harvests and publishes with a query 
interface.  Anyway it's somewhat semantics here.

On Apr 6, 2005, at 2:30 AM, KevinBenson wrote:

> 3.) If harvester is a "Full Registry" then at an unknown 
time 
> (presumably
> when it kicks off its harvests), it MUST harvest any 
registry type 
> that it
> has been put as a <managedAuthority> and being managed by 
its own 
> registry.
> *Final note smaller publishing registries should be 
recommended to 
> negotiate
> on having a Full Registry manage its authority id.

I think we need to be careful about mandating that Full 
Registries MUST 
harvest any registry type.
Suppose that someone puts up a publishing registry for a 
particular 
specialist resource type for which they have defined their 
own set of 
extension schema. The schema are horrendously complicated 
(even by IVOA 
standards) and will not translate easily into a relational 
structure. 
Unfortunately their local Full Registry is based on a 
relational db and 
so will not harvest them. Of course, in this case, the 
publishing 
registry could find another Full Registry that could contain 
their 
contents but the point is that Full Registries are not 
necessarily 
full.

	Cheers,

	Matthew




-------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------