RofR

[Matthew J. Graham]

Hi,

On Apr 11, 2005, at 6:31 AM, Tony Linde wrote:

>
> If a registry supports a query interface, it is a full registry - it 
> must
> contain all resource records (therefore must harvest from other 
> registries
> in order to do so).

I disagree. A domain specific registry, e.g. one that contains 
resources of relevance to the GRB community, can support the query 
interface because GRB folks want to be able to search it but does not 
need to hold all resource records which the GRB people have no interest 
in and would be extra admin for the registry maintainer.

The options for a registry are really:
- is it a publishing registry (I can harvest the records it maintains)
- is it a "full" registry (it contains most records which I can access)

The availability of a search interface has nothing to do with the size 
of the contents.

I also think we need to drop this idea of a full registry because 
supporting every variant schema that every astronomer comes up is 
unrealistic (and this has nothing to do with relational/native XML 
implementation), e.g. is Astrogrid intending to support the horrible 
hack schema that identifies records from the Penge Local Astronomy 
Youth Club?  I think we should have an extra piece of metadata on the 
Registry record which lists the schemata that the registry supports and 
this should also have one method on the Registry Interface at least: 
getSupportedSchema() - may also isSupported(XMLSchema mySchema)?

	Cheers,

	Matthew