Standard IVORNs, data model identifiers

[Mark Taylor]

On Tue, 18 Feb 2014, Markus Demleitner wrote:

> (a) have unversioned standard identifiers in dataModels (and possibly
> other places like standardIDs) henceforth, i.e.,
> ivo://ivoa.net/std/RegTAP -- that kinda works as long as the standard
> evolves smoothly enough and we make a new record for a new major
> version ("std/RegTAP2").  But then there's no machine-readable way of
> figuring out the version actually found on the other end, which is
> probably not good.
> 
> (b) go on as we have so far and create a new standards record for
> every (even minor) version that we need in standardIDs and similar
> places.
> 
> On a longer run, we might want to fix VOResource to allow fragment
> identifiers in IdentifierURIs, but that's not an option right now.  I
> need to put the id people should be looking for into the RegTAP
> document now.
> 
> My feeling is that (a) would be nicer in priciple, but it would be
> basically impossible for a client to use any features introduced  in
> point versions.  That would throw us back to (b) with the implied
> inflation in records.
> 
> Opinions?  Elegant solutions, anyone?  Please?

I have nothing elegant to offer I'm afraid, but the idea of a new ID
for every minor standard version sounds unpalatable.  In practice
I find that for most of the versioned/versionable things I access,
it's more important to be able to identify the thing with
(the version-free Platonic ideal of) the standard than to know
exactly which version I'm talking to.  So unless somebody argues
persuasively otherwise, I'd vote for (a).

Mark

--
Mark Taylor   Astronomical Programmer   Physics, Bristol University, UK
m.b.taylor at bris.ac.uk +44-117-9288776  http://www.star.bris.ac.uk/~mbt/