VOEvent session

[Mike Fitzpatrick]

On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 9:42 AM, Roy Williams <roy at cacr.caltech.edu> wrote:

>
> This is a note on schema complexity for the proposed VOEvent v2.0,
> comparing it with VOEvent v1.1. The cojmplexity is in fact REDUCED in v2.0.
>

In practice, isn't this really only a theoretical reduction in complexity?
 There is a
clause that says any STC element may be used, and I agree we shouldn't tie
the
ability to fully parse STC to a understand a packet.    However, how much of
STC comes into play here?

OTOH, in 2.0 to build useful client software I need to now understand the
new
simpleTimeSeries elements.  So, I've gone from "there might be STC" to "I
can
now probably rely on having to support <simpleTimeSeries>" to build  a
useful
app.  Unless I have a major project driver (e.g. LSST), as a developer, I
see this as
daunting and pushing VOEvent 2.0  support way down on my list.

I WOULD support the idea of TimeSeries in the simple table scheme since it
can
convey the same data.  I WOULD also support (as a developer) changes needed
to work with the IVOA-standard TS serialization.  I WILL NOT support (as a
developer)
every convention that might be used in the VOEvent community.

Roy follows up with the message on a simple Table element, unless there is
a
technical reason we can't do TS with that then (may we need to add a PARAM?)
I don't see a need for anything else (other than the IVOA-version of a TS).

-Mike
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.ivoa.net/pipermail/voevent/attachments/20101210/408811fe/attachment.html>