[Plastic-devs] illegal/unrecommended use of IVOA identifiers

[Ray Plante]

Hi,

On Fri, 17 Nov 2006, John Taylor wrote:
> It's certainly an alternative worth considering, though I see two problems: 
> 1) we're already using the #fragment for something else

You can do what ever you like after the # following the IVOA id, including 
having another pound.

If it helps, ? has the exact same effect from the IVOA ID perspective--it 
marks the end of the identifier that is resolvable via the registry.  You 
could then have messages that look like

    ivo://votech.org/plastic?info/getIVORN#...

2) it centralises the 
> definition of messages in one place - we want to avoid this.  So far all the 
> messages have been defined "with the votech.org authId" (bad bad choice), but 
> I'd really like to see ivo://estar.org/voevent/do/something/funky appear at 
> some point.  Now we'd be crazy to let Alasdair get his hands on our 
> publishing registry...so how would he add his message to the master list?

So by avoiding centralization, I take you mean that you want to allow 
anyone to define a new message.  My recommendation is that that through 
one Standard resource record, one can define a set of properties (that are 
presumably related).  You define your core Plastic message; Alasdair, in a 
sepearate Standard record, defines his extended set.  Applications can 
either describe support for whole sets or individual properties.

I think it can work.

cheers,
Ray