VOResource 1.1 RFC

Baptiste Cecconi baptiste.cecconi at obspm.fr
Thu Jun 8 00:02:41 CEST 2017

> Hi Baptiste,
> On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 05:30:38PM +0200, Baptiste Cecconi wrote:
> > The Creator and Contact of VOResource elements both include an
> > ivo-id attribute to be used for referring to contact/creator
> > details already declared in the registry. This is also present in
> > the VOEvent data model and it could be useful in many other cases.
> > This allows to keep track of personal detail changes (email,
> > phone???) in existing resources without editing the resource
> > itself. I couldn't find any real-world implementation of this
> > VOResource feature. Any example out there? I'm interested to see
> > how to declare such a resource. 
> That's a nice little exercise in writing RegTAP queries:
> select distinct base_role 
> from rr.res_role 
> where role_ivoid is not NULL
> If you actually run this (e.g., on http://reg.g-vo.org/tap <http://reg.g-vo.org/tap>), you'll
> see that indeed the only base_roles with @ivo-id set is publisher and
> contributor (and the contributor ones are flukes that arguably are
> bugs in my RegTAP ingestion logic; the RegTAP queries to figure this
> out are left as an exercise to the reader).
> The valid cases reference vr:Organisation records. Support for these
> has been part of VOResource from the start.
> And indeed, there is no vr:Person (or, in line with current efforts
> in the DM WG, perhaps vr:Party), and apparently nobody has, so far,
> bothered to experiment with such a thing.
> > This is already implemented in other registries (such as SPASE for
> > instance). It would be a charge to the naming authority to maintain
> > its own Person-VOResource descriptors, but I think this is fully
> > acceptable.
> It would actually be a really minor change -- we'd just define
> another vr:Resource subtype. 
yes, that's what I was assuming.
>  Sure, title, curation, and content (the
> mandatory metadata elements of vr:Resource) might come a bit odd for
> that type (is a person's name their title?  I refuse the temptation
> to crack jokes about curation/creator and content/type), but that's
> nothing a few carefully chosen words in the type's documentation
> couldn't fix.
> But I'm not sure such a resource type would actually be widely used.
> I have to admit I'm not familiar at all with SPASE, but before going
> ahead with anything like this I'd like to hear their experiences and
> use cases.
I've posted a few links in the TDIG discussion page of last interop in Shanghai:
http://wiki.ivoa.net/twiki/bin/view/IVOA/InterOpMay2017-TD-001 <http://wiki.ivoa.net/twiki/bin/view/IVOA/InterOpMay2017-TD-001>

You can also graphically explore the registry here:
http://www.spase-group.org/smwg/explorer/ <http://www.spase-group.org/smwg/explorer/>
where you have a "Person" branch in the SPASE Registry tree, next to other branches. 
> So, unless many people speak up now they've been waiting for such a
> thing I'd lean towards not putting anything like it in VOResource
> 1.1.  If there's a modicum of interest, there's nothing wrong with
> prototyping an extension (VOParty, say), put in a few records and see
> how it goes.  It would work just as well, but if it turns out nobody
> is registering themselves or that the records aren't used, VOResource
> isn't burdened with an extra feature for the remaining 1.x series.

We would be happy to test and use it for Europlanet/VESPA, and I guess that as it is explicitly mentioned in the VOEvent documentation, we should be able to find other candidates within the TDIG.

>         -- Markus

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.ivoa.net/pipermail/registry/attachments/20170608/3fb52bed/attachment.html>

More information about the registry mailing list