VOEvent v2.0, some thoughts

[Alasdair Allan]

Rob Seaman wrote:
> This will be a major upgrade to the capabilities of VOEvent, but  
> each of these improvements likely require only narrowly construed  
> tweaks to the standard itself.  v1 packets should validate against  
> the new schema.

I'd go with something slightly stronger, which is that v1 packets  
must still validate against the v2 schema.

> V2.0 will remain independent of transport, but we should also  
> discuss the status of the transport document.  I'm happy to appear  
> somewhere down the list of authors for this one - who has time to  
> lead the charge?

As you know it never made it into the HTN3 proceedings due to  
suck'age on my part. However it's 95% there (although still missing a  
section/page on Jabber from Caltech).

> I believe a need will soon become obvious for a third document,  
> namely the user's guide that vanished early on from the standard.   
> This will convey best practices for things such as the usage of  
> <params>, etc., and in particular will be the entree into the  
> purpose tailored VOEvent vocabulary that must be built or  
> identified as part of #2 above.  I would also like to smith the  
> words for this document since VO-GCN needs coherent guidelines to  
> build against in the next few months.  The more the merrier for the  
> team here.

I've got some notes somewhere that I've passed onto people who have  
set up servers/clients talking to the eSTAR broker. I'll break them  
out and forward them to you for adaption/inclusion/revision.

> Finally, perhaps the SEAP team might bring us up to date?

I should probably leave this one for Elizabeth.

Al.