Re: in place of Hervé(herve.wozniak at newb6.u-strasbg.fr)

[Carlos Rodrigo Blanco]

Hi Santi

Oh, no. I didn't understand other thing. Sorry if I seemed to mean that. 
Sometimes it's difficult to express oneself by email and words can sound 
different from what is intended...

No hard feelings at all from me. Just trying to talk about the subject :-)

Carlos

> Dear Carlos
> I have nothing against Miguel and/or any person of your group. You did really a very good job. The aim of my
> message
> was just to say : "we need to discuss definitively about this point and to make clear to persons like me that
> have a very poor knowledge about
> this issue the pro and cons of the various possible (suggested) protocols.
>  all the best
>  Santi
> 
> Il giorno 20/feb/09, alle ore 11:49, Carlos Rodrigo Blanco ha scritto:
> 
> 
> ------=neXtPaRt_1235126999
> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII
>
>       1) I fully agree with the Herve'' s statement " something can not be 
> considered accepted if the others do not express their opinion"..
> I think that we should start a discussion (see below).
> 
> 
> I don't even think that Miguel thinks that. And actually he doesn't say 
> such a thing in his mail.
> 
> I guess that he just wanted to start this discussion. We submitted 
> a note about S3, and we know perfectly that a note is not an standard 
> (actually, few things in the VO are standards), it's just a proposal to be 
> discussed. And it is a proposal that is fully described in a document, 
> that follows the same philosophy that other VO standars, that has been 
> implemented for several cases of interest and has been presented in 
> several talks.
> 
> We don't intend it to be perfect (of course it isn't) or to be the full 
> solution to all the problems in a "theory in the VO" context. So we are 
> absolutely open to comments, discussion, critizisms and whatever idea that 
> can improve it or change it to make it more useful.
> 
> But we don't really understand, either, why the SimDB/SimDAP iniciative is 
> promoted to other IVOA groups as the "proposal by the Theory Interest 
> Group" when we, at this group, haven't been able to really discuss it.
> 
> The fact, as I see it, is that this group has been always the "SNAP 
> interest group", the "cosmological simulations interest group" or the 
> "big numerical simulations interest group". It's not really a critizism, I 
> think that we all saw it in this way, both the people interested in that 
> kind of simulations and the people that were interested in other 
> questions. In fact, other things related to theoretical models in the VO, 
> like theoretical spectra models, were discussed somewhere else with no 
> interaction at all with this group. Even at Cambridge, when Miguel asked 
> about the group interest in this things he was aswered with something like 
> "we are not really interested in that, if you are interested, it is your 
> work to promote and lead that subject".
> 
> Only recently this group has started to be interested in other kind of 
> theoretical problems that have been labeled as "microsimulations" but
> biased by the original perspective (and it's perfectly understable).
> 
> Actually, I don't really understand why we should work in a unique idea or
> protocol. I think that it is as saying that the VO should have only one 
> protocol for observational data and that SSAP, SIAP, ConeSearch, Skynode, 
> TAP, etc should work in converging to an only protocol.
> 
> But I'm making this mail too long, sorry.
> 
> I just hope that this series of mails is the begining of some useful 
> discussion :-)
> 
> Carlos
>
>       Some time ago, we presented in the theory list a Note describing
> the S3 protocol. It has been also presented in several conferences
> proceedings.
> We have be waited for comments, specially from SimDB efforts (has 
> proposed by Herve in his mail just after the fall interop). Since no 
> negative comment has been presented we assume that every body agree with 
> the protocol and its development (or at least there is no major problems 
> or real needs to merge S3 and SimDB) 
> Please, let us know if you don not agree with that. In the mean time we 
> will continue (and discuss in this list) further developments.
> 
> I also would be very happy if any other iniciative post its development 
> in the list and inform the rest of the persons in the list about (and do 
> not re-invent  developments)
> 
> 
> 
> ------=neXtPaRt_1235126999
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> 
> INAF-OACTe
> Fortigate Antivirus
> 
> ------=neXtPaRt_1235126999--
> 
> 
> Santi Cassisi
> INAF - Astronomical Observatory of Teramo
> Via M. Maggini s.n.c.
> 64100 Teramo, Italy
> 
> Tel +39-0861-439713
> Fax +39-0861-439740
> skype: santi.cassisi
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>