Minor update to VOEvent PR

[Rob Seaman]

Hi Norman,

>> A new version of the VOEvent2 Proposed Recommendation has been uploaded.
>> http://www.ivoa.net/internal/IVOA/VOEventTwoPointZero/PR-VOEvent-2.0-20110402.html
> 
> Sorry for a bit of delay in getting back on this.

Yeah, I was out of town the last several days, too.

> I looked at the new section 3.9 on <Reference>.  I can see the change to requiring @meaning to be a full URI, but the new text might still be a little thin on detail, which could easily lead to variant implementations
> 
> In particular:
> 
>> 3.9.2 meaning — The nature of the document referenced (anyURI). This attribute is optional.
> 
> I'd have hoped to see a little more of an explanation of what this URI should be, beyond "It is anticipated that a Note will be written" about them.

The WG has gone back-and-forth quite a bit over this.  Such a note is necessary since this reaches outside the v2.0 VOEvent spec.  In effect the original v2.0 language about a "type" attribute with URI value has been clarified to be "meaning" and "anyURI".  Rather than a substantial disagreement here, the position hasn't actually moved much.  If the IVOA wants to clarify what "meaning" means, VOEvent should be happy to benefit, but we've already moved pretty far outside the sweet-spot of what this WG is about - especially for an issue like references that are secondary here and perhaps more central to other WGs.

>> 3.9.3 mimetype — An optional MIME type [36] for the referenced document.
> 
> Similarly, this MIME type could be a variety of things, and since the MIME type given here could potentially differ from the MIME type of the document received, it'd be good to note which has priority (the MIME type declared by the document beinr received).  It'd also be good to note what this is for, naly a hit rather than something you'd necessarily expect to work with.

Ditto.  I'm personally somewhat reluctant to open the MIME door within VOEvent.  But having done so, it is up to the broader IVOA outside that door to address the deeper questions.  Perhaps MIME issues in the IVOA can be addressed in the same note as above.  Maybe this is a good topic for the Semantics WG.  VOEvent is simply providing an attribute to convey such values.

> I included some text for this section in my message of 2011 March 24 00:37:03 GMT. That may have been too prolix (and I admit a tendency to run to the formal in these contexts), but I thought a fair proportion of that text was at least useful.

That message could make a good contribution to the noted Note.

> We wouldn't want the VOEvent document to be full of legalese, but if it's too vague and suggestive, people will implement things based on what they guess the meaning to be, which could cause problems later.

This has always been the art of this particular standard.  When we have attempted to introduce a specific schema expression such as SimpleTimeSeries, voices have been raised telling us to take it back out again.

Since your comments here are about the document, not about the standard, any further discussion or action here can take place during the RFC period.

Thanks!

Rob