VOSpace 2.0 Proposed Recommendation: Request for CommentsThis document will act as RFC centre for the IVOA VOSpace 2.0 Proposed Recommendation. The latest version of the specification (02-Dec-2011) can be found at: VOSpace is the IVOA interface to distributed storage. This specification presents the first RESTful version of the interface, which is functionally equivalent to the SOAP-based VOSpace 1.15 specification . Note that all prior VOSpace (1.x) clients will not work with this new version of the interface.Reference Interoperable ImplementationsThe following are known implementations of VOSpace 2.0:
Implementations Validators(If any, indicate here the links to Implementations Validators)RFC Review Period: 20-May-2012 to 22-Jun-2012TCG Review Period: TCG_start_date - TCG_end_dateComments from the IVOA Community during RFC period: 20-May-2012 to 22-Jun-2012In order to add a comment to the document, please edit this page and add your comment to the list below in the format used for the example (include your Wiki Name so that authors can contact you for further information). When the author(s) of the document have considered the comment, they will provide a response after the comment. Additional discussion about any of the comments or responses can be conducted on the GWS VOSpace mailing list (vospace@ivoa.net). However, please be sure to enter your initial comments here for full consideration in any future revisions of this document | ||||||||
Added: | ||||||||
> > |
Comment by NormanGraySect.2 mentions that VOSpace URIs may have fragments, and illustrates how a fragment is literally copied into the retrieval URL from thevos: URL. However this is the only mention of 'fragment' in the document. If the intention is that the VOSpace spec regards the path+query+fragment as opaque, then it would be useful to state this explicitly in Sect.2. Given the potential problems with fragments (see Urbana TCG slides and draft uri-fragments note) it might be useful to do one of the following:
text/html; charset=UTF-8 (the meta@http-equiv element in the HTML header is ignored), but the content is ISO-8859-1, and there are two soft hyphens (0xad) in the Sect 2 example identifier which appear wrongly in a browser which pays attention to the MIME type. | |||||||
<--
|