RFC and IVOA

[Roy Williams]

Rob
I would say there are three places where the IVOA could benefit event 
science through its standards process, and the VO projects could benefit 
science through building robust software. See below for notes.

I will not be able to attend the IVOA. But thank you for putting the 
VOEvent session at a reasonable time -- do you know if remote 
participation might be possible/wanted/invited?
Roy

(1) Transport
	How will events be transported in real time?
	Prototypes running now based on:
		Email, Jabber/CACR, Jabber/LIGO, Dakota, ATELStream
	Current differences preclude interoperability
	Jabber standardization would be good if it comes with software!
		plus bridges to Email, Dakota and ATELStream
	Other issues: Who can send, Antispam measures, Signatures

(2) Registry
	Finding event streams and event servers
	Is a sample event sufficient to define a stream?
	Prototypes running now
		based on Skyalert at CACR, LIGO, PSU, and LSST
	Do we include replicated streams?
	What about a modified stream -- eg links changed to local cache?
	What about a stream that is a substream of another?

(3) Query
	Working with past events
	How to query a set of *portfolios* not just lone events
		Interesting queries are cross-stream
		SEAP proposal could be expanded to SPAP (P=portfolio)
	Prototypes running now:
		Python SPAP in Skyalert, JSON from iPhones




On 04/25/2011 10:34 AM, Rob Seaman wrote:
> Howdy!
>
> 1) Halfway through the RFC period, and there are few comments yet:
>
> http://www.ivoa.net/cgi-bin/twiki/bin/view/IVOA/VOEventV2RFC
>
> Note that comments along the lines of "This looks swell!" are equally
> welcome.
>
> 2) Who from the WG will be attending the Naples InterOp?  There is
> one VOEvent session scheduled (Tuesday), in addition to whatever
> pertinent discussion occurs at the TCG meeting on Sunday:
>
> http://www.ivoa.net/cgi-bin/twiki/bin/view/IVOA/InterOpMay2011
>
> The VOEvent agenda will hopefully involve wrapping up v2.0 issues and
> planning for post-v2.0 activities.  Please comment on priorities for
> agenda items.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Rob
>