VOEvent References
Frederic V. Hessman
Hessman at Astro.physik.Uni-Goettingen.DE
Tue Mar 22 01:52:41 PDT 2011
Ah, when Norman waxes eloquent .... He's usually right at the end,
but so was Cassandra.
> The MIME types don't _have_ to be standardised ones, of course.
> It's not pretty, but you could say
>
> mimetype='text/x-sextractor-catalogue'
This is not just "not pretty", this is totally useless. After
finally getting the IVOA is acknowledge that there is only 1
reasonable way to maintain a list of terms (and MIME is exactly that),
we go back to uncontrollable ASCII?
I'm not against MIME, it's just not enough to be able to specify
formats other than those in common usage. A
CelestiaObjectDescriptionFile is just as much a simulation as a JPEG
is a finder chart: the only difference is that there is a
standardizable format description for the latter but not - yet - for
the former.
To assist Rob, we need to bring things to fruition and make a final
decision on <Reference>:
- link attribute
The only nominee is:
uri anyURI (current proposal)
- content and name of the "format" attribute
The nominees are:
type anyURI or anything else (e.g. UCD, MIME, ...)(current docs
say "should") (current proposal)
type only anyURI (docs say "must") but otherwise unspecified
mimetype a mimetype (text but whatever that means and in the hopes
you have one)
format a SKOS vocabulary term representing a file format (which
should include the possibility of a VOSpace designation for formats
forseen by the IVOA)
- content and name of the "meaning" attribute
The nominees are:
name "A short, optional name to be used in descriptive
text." (from present doc) (current proposal)
content a SKOS vocabulary term
meaning a SKOS vocabulary term
- tag content
The nominees are:
forbidden nobody is going to read it anyway (current
proposal)
allowed but nobody is going to read it anyway, so the docs say
"why bother?"
I vote for:
uri,format,meaning,allowed
And the winner is.....
Rick
More information about the voevent
mailing list