RegTAP Post-RFC: Whitespace/NULL

[Markus Demleitner]

Dear list,

as promised, here's the second installment of the Post-RFC
consultation on RegTAP based on

http://wiki.ivoa.net/internal/IVOA/InterOpMay2014Registry/regtaprfc.pdf

The issues at hand have to do with whitespace and are discussed at
some length in 5. and 6. in that document.

I believe the question of whitespace normalisation is tame.  The few
cases in which our stuff doesn't come in xs:token in the first place
(and rather in xs:string) look essentially like oversights to me --
nobody intended for leading or trailing whitespace to be part of
these things.

So, given the vagaries of what the parsers actually do discussed in
the lecture notes, I tend to require that all strings are
whitespace-stripped; I wouldn't say anything about normalising
internal whitespace, as I don't forsee relevant interoperability
problems there.

The question whether NULLs and empty strings should be made
equivalent in the database itself is not quite so clear.  In the
session basically everyone that said something argued for folding
them, mainly on grounds that there's no good reason for telling them
apart in the first place.

I'd accomodate  that by saying all empty strings (and, by the
whitespace-stripping requirement, whitespace-only strings) MUST be
mapped to NULL on ingestion.

Pre-Interop consultation with other implementors, on the other hand,
indicated that would be unpopular with them.  Database people tend to
be suspicious of NULLs, and there are good reasons for that, both
from a theoretical and a practical point of view.

Me, I just want that all registries do the same thing.  What it is I
don't care much.  If nobody comes up with widely accepted arguments
for why that's a terrible idea, I'd do the NULL-folding as sketched
above.

Cheers,

         Markus