potential changes to VODataService!

[KevinBenson]

I added a comment as well to the wiki page.

Here it is pasted:
Originally did not have much of a problem with the Proposal, but 
thinking a little more one small problem here in Astrogrid is we have 
released upgraded a few registries already and the XML must validate to 
schema to be allowed into the registry, if a user comes in and writes 
XML to the 'new' namespace schema whereby placing a few of those 
optional elements it will reject his entry because it is invalid (the 
registry knows about the 'old' schema).  I suspect I will need to 
upgrade these registries anyways for a few minor fixes in OAI so maybe 
it is not a huge issue, but I think it is more wise to do the Alternate 
proposal and use a different namespace since this 1.0 schema is already 
public.  Also note I am thinking this might break one of your rules you 
mentioned on Nov 21 'Version Numbers on XMLSchemata' see this url: 
http://www.ivoa.net/forum/registry/0611/1760.htm


cheers,
Kevin

Guy Rixon wrote:
> Ray,
>
> v1.0 of VODataService has already been issued and used; I'm writing 
> software against it today that I hope to release next week. We really 
> shouldn't be redefining the schema for a namespace that is in use. I 
> vote that the changes be held over to v1.1.
>
> Guy
>
> On 7 Jun 2007, at 13:41, Ray Plante wrote:
>
>> Hi RWGers,
>>
>> Thanks to those of you have responded with comments on results from 
>> Beijing available on the twiki at
>> http://www.ivoa.net/twiki/bin/view/IVOA/IOMay07RWGIssues.  As you may 
>> recall, I've asked that you get you comments in by tomorrow, June 8.
>>
>> I want to draw your special attention to issue #8 which proposes 
>> CHANGING THE VORESOURCE SCHEMA.  Unless I hear complaints other wise, 
>> we will proceed with the first proposal in which we issue a new 
>> version of the schema with *no change in the namespace URL*.
>>
>> thanks,
>> Ray
>