msdemlei at ari.uni-heidelberg.de
Tue Jan 30 11:43:45 CET 2018
Thanks for the review.
On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 10:24:23AM +0100, Marco Molinaro wrote:
> I like the WD, here follow some (I imagine minor) points.
> In the introduction, resource records' numbers may be
> updated (now it's nearly 20000 records out of about 40
> registries), but maybe you'd like to wait for this WD to
> change state before.
Right -- we've grown quite a bit since RegTAP 1.0. Since right now,
I'm counting 19488 resources from 38 (actually, one of these has been
down for a long time, so it should be 37), I've just put in the 20000
and 40 now. This should work by the time this will go to REC, I
> Also it refers to RI-1.0 and the XML search interface.
> Does it make sense, given RI-1.1 RFC?
Well, I'd really like to avoid referencing in-progress documents to
avoid the DocStd folks' wrath (who mandate for PRs: "It is
appropriate to reference this document only as a recommended standard
that is under review").
But RI 1.1 should really go to REC at the next exec. I've put
todo notes to the two places that, I think, are pertinent. If I've
missed any, feel free to to note these places, too.
But now that you mention it, SimpleDALRegExt has seen an update in
the meantime, and I've updated that. I'm not taking bets yet whether
RegTAP 1.1 or TAP 1.1 will be faster -- and anyway, TAP 1.1 changes
probably aren't relevant for RegTAP.
> Given the RegTAP tables now report datatypes in the
> more general form, I think we can nicely remove the
> Appendix C.
I'm a bit torn here -- on the one hand, less text is always good. On
the other hand, giving people an idea of what they may expect in
which columns is a nice service.
I've put a note there that it'll be gone unless someone speaks up for
it before we go to REC.
> There are still a couple of "RegTAP#1.0" strings around
> in §7 (pg.12) and §9.
> Apart from that (and maybe a fix to the nearly empty
> pg.17) I'm ok with the specification update.
Yes -- the table with the columns for rr.resource has become too
long for the inline format. I'll think of some typographic fix that
doesn't break anything else (the way I've hacked inlinetable makes
using supertabular a pain).
In case you want to review them: Changes are in Volute rev. 4727.
More information about the registry