StandardRegExt: comments on a few changes requested

[Ray Plante]

Hi registry folks,

Today I uploaded a revision of the StandardRegExt PR document to the 
StandardRegExt twiki page 
(http://www.ivoa.net/cgi-bin/twiki/bin/view/IVOA/StandardsRegExt).  
The changes were in response to the last TCG review comments.  Two of 
the changes are worth noting to the WG; if you have any concerns about 
these changes, please share them.  

  1.  Matthew Graham (VOEvent WG) suggested that adding two more 
      allowed values to the "status" attribute of the 
      <endorsedVersion> element:  "iwd" and "note".  This attribute 
      indicates that status of the version of the standard in the IVOA 
      process, and the previously allowed versions were "rec", "pr", 
      and "wd".  I agreed and added these values; however, I note that 
      the schema must be updated.  This is should not be disruptive as 
      I do not believe the schema has been put into use anywhere, yet.  

  2.  Matthew also asked for an addition example, which I added as an 
      appendix.  This triggered a need to add a paragraph to section 
      3.1.2 (that is, I converted a non-normative note box to a 
      normative paragraph).  This explains a recommendation on how to 
      describe DAL services specifically to label optional but 
      ignorable input parameters with 'use="ignore"'; see the final 
      paragraph for rationale and details. 

      One of the things I discovered when writing this was an error in 
      the VODataService document where the use attribute is defined.  
      The schema defines 3 possible values:  "required", "optional", 
      and "ignore"; however, the explanatory text in the document only 
      includes "required" and "optional".  I bet we can fix this 
      problem pretty easily; nevertheless, I have not let this error 
      stop me from making reference to the "ignore" value in 
      StandardRegExt.  

Your thoughts are welcome.  I will ask to have this new version to the 
repository within the next day; however, I will delay request for 
final consideration of the revision by the Exec until I've heard from 
the RWG chair.  

cheers,
Ray