table metadata and the registry

[Ray Plante]

Hey Tony,

On Tue, 8 May 2007, Tony Linde wrote:
> Hi Ray,
>
> Looks like we're converging. (See also response to Doug re VOSI.)
>
>> Do you agree that we should try to find a way to do this?
>
> I assumed that was what was being done. That was my understanding from
> Victoria: that resources not stored with detailed metadata would be 'fixed'
> by calling the individual services.

Well, I'm 90% sure that's not how it is being done for Vizier resources, 
but I'm not sure what the deal is for specific AstroGrid services.

The problem with going to the individual services is that for our current 
std. catalog services, the method for getting this info is different for 
each service.  Thus, there is strong incentive to get this information 
into the VOResource record up front, prior to harvesting.  If there were a 
common way to retrieve this information from a resource (service or 
otherwise) in a common format, it would not be necessary to pre-load it 
into the VOResource record.

That is what my URL provides: the ability to 'fix' your metadata without 
passing on that fix to us.

>> begin deprecating the explicit inclusion of table metadata.  There is
>
> I don't *think* we can do that. Unless we get feedback that every existing
> and possible service can provide its own detailed metadata, I'm not sure we
> can rule out people entering the detailed metadata directly into the
> registry and leaving it there forever more.

That's fine.  We have to provide backward compatibility.  If we can 
convert most of the existing services to this alternate approach and 
discourage direct inclusion of table metadata in the future, we would be a 
lot happier.

I sense this thread winding down.  Let's see what comes out of Beijing. 
I'll try to keep you and Kevin informed by email.

cheers,
Ray