RofR

[Paul Harrison]

Tony Linde wrote:
>>  - a RoR can be created that could be used by an intelligent 
>>agent to discover which registries that it wanted to query
> 
> 
> How can it decide which registries to query - knowing that a registry exists
> and covers certain authorities is meaningless from a query point of view.
> You still won't know what resources it contains if it is less than a full
> list - if it is a full list you just query it anyway, you don't need any
> other registry.

> 
> 
>>  - a private "publishing" registry could be supported, by the "full" 
>>registry claiming to be the "owner" and the rest of the world 
>>would be none the wiser.
> 
> 
> Which is why we don't need the managed/owned distinction anymore.

so you are now saying that that term managed is meaningless?
> 
> 
>>  - public "publishing" registries (which seem to be desired 
>>by the majority on this list) could be supported by the 
>>publishing registry acknowledging ownership, so that people 
>>know where to go to make updates to records, but not 
>>declaring itself to be a "managing" registry for the 
>>authorityID, which is a statment that it does not want to 
>>service searches.
> 
> 
> You've mixed up two concepts. Managing and searching are completely distinct
> concepts, neither to do with the other.
> 
> We *do* need to distinguish which registries support searching.

that is what I have been saying in this thread - it is whether you can 
search on an authorityID that is important

-- 
Paul Harrison
ESO Garching
www.eso.org