VEP-007 update

[BONNAREL FRANCOIS]

Hi all

I agree withe the new definition and I agree with Baptiste's statement 
below.

Cheers
François
Le 19/10/2021 à 14:44, Baptiste Cecconi a écrit :
> Hi Markus,
>
> I think this will do for now.
> We may have to iterate with a new VEP later if we need to refine the #documentation vs #metadata discussion.
>
> I would thus vote for going forward now.
>
> Cheers,
> Baptiste
>
>> Le 19 oct. 2021 à 11:01, Markus Demleitner <msdemlei at ari.uni-heidelberg.de> a écrit :
>>
>> Dear Colleagues,
>>
>> As noted in
>> http://mail.ivoa.net/pipermail/semantics/2021-September/002846.html,
>> VEP-007 (#documentation in datalink/core) exposed a problem with
>> #documentation's definition.  It currently explicitly requires
>> human-readability:
>>
>>   Extra information on the item in human-readable text form, ranging
>>   from processing logs to weather reports to technical documents on
>>   instruments to related publications.
>>
>> It turns out that "human-readability" is hard to define.  Is a FITS
>> header human-readable?  Or a PDF label?  Or... a PDF?  Frankly, if
>> all I have is a text editor, I'll go for the FITS header rather than
>> the PDF.  On the other hand, there are few things that are
>> human-unreadable if given the appropriate tools.
>>
>> Hence, I'd say the "human-readable" ought to be taken out of the
>> definition as not reproducible between indviduals, and also not
>> useful in practice; I'm quite sure that I'd be cross with the
>> publishers if they had a detached PDF label but wouldn't show it
>> under #documentation.
>>
>> I have amended VEP-007 accordingly
>> (https://volute.g-vo.org/svn/trunk/projects/semantics/veps/VEP-007.txt)
>> to change documentation's definition to:
>>
>>   Structured or unstructured metadata helping to understand,
>>   interpret, or work with #this.  Such information can range from
>>   processing logs to weather reports to technical documents on
>>   instruments to related publications.
>>
>> The part on "structured or unstructured" caters (or so I hope)
>> towards François' concerns from
>> http://mail.ivoa.net/pipermail/semantics/2021-September/002844.html,
>> where once we have further terms talking about explicitly
>> computer-readable ("structured") metadata and we find we have to
>> enable common behaviour among them, the introduction of, say,
>> *#structured-metadata will not come as a surprise.
>>
>> Can everyone live with this?  Do you perhaps have suggestions for how
>> to make this more precise?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>              Markus