---+ Discussion on Registry Interfaces Version 2 The current draft for a schema letting people query the registry via TAP ("RegTAP") is at http://volute.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/projects/registry/regtap/RegTAP-fmt.html; check out the directory this is in from volute to edit and fix things (which you're welcome to do). Here's a draft set of (non-vendor-specific) CREATE TABLE statements that define the schema: [[%ATTACHURL%/createtables.sql][createtables.sql]] ([[IVOA.RayPlante][RP]] - 2012-11-16). There is a draft for a replacement of the Registry Interfaces specification at http://volute.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/projects/registry/RegistryInterface; RegTAP used to be part of this, and while it's in development, work on Registry Interface itself is suspended. See also [[RestfulRegistryInterfaceReq]]. Topics the authors would particularly appreciate community feedback on: ---++ Requests for discussion Questions discussed at the last interop are on http://docs.g-vo.org/talks/2012-sampa-ri2.pdf (you're welcome to add your own...) * Is it really a good idea to have all role-like things in one table (res_role) rather than have creator, publisher, and contact information in separate tables? * Pro: You save between one and three tables, and it has a nice relational feel * Con: It's completely against VOResource; it may be a bit more inconvenient to query * Should the tables live in the ivoa schema (like obscore)? Should they have a schema of their own (like right now)? * Should footprint_ivoid and data_url go into res_details rather than being given a prominent place in the resource table? * Should there be a required table containing VOResource XML fragments? * Pro: many implementations that have an OAI-PMH endpoint will have such a table anyway, and certain classes of clients could use this kind of "all info in one" representation * Con: it "muddys the water", and it's a major implementation effort if you don't do OAI-PMH anyway; clients needing VOResource can always get the records using OAI-PMH. ---++ Old discussion items * Is this thing just too complex to be implemented by the current workforce-strapped registries? * Are there volunteers/is there an expectation that this will be implemented by more than one group? If not, the considerable effort of standardising it is of questionable value (-- MarkTaylor) . * At least EuroVO will hopefully have a completely independent implementation; there are activities to at least mirror the ingested tables from other projects; for further activities, see this page (-- Markus Demleitner) ---++ Requests for contributions * Could someone mark up not NULL-constraints in the DB schema based on the XML schema? * Who'd work with us in creating a validation suite? <!-- * Set ALLOWTOPICRENAME = IVOA.TWikiAdminGroup -->
Attachments
Attachments
Topic attachments
I
Attachment
History
Action
Size
Date
Who
Comment
sql
createtables.sql
r1
manage
5.1 K
2012-11-16 - 20:22
RayPlante
non-vendor-specific CREATE TABLE statements that implement DM's proposed model
This topic: IVOA
>
WebHome
>
IvoaResReg
>
RegistryInterface
>
RestfulRegistryInterfaceReq
>
RelationalRegistryDM
>
RI2Discussion
Topic revision: r6 - 2013-02-11 - MarkusDemleitner
Copyright © 2008-2025 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWiki?
Send feedback