UWS v1.1 Proposed Recommendation: Request for Comments

Public discussion page for the IVOA UWS 1.1 Proposed Recommendation.

The latest version of the UWS Specification can be found at:

• http://ivoa.net/documents/UWS/20150626/index.html

Reference Interoperable Implementations

Would the implementors of the UWS 1.1 specification please add details. Or, please remove your implementation from this list if not correct.

Astrogrid Implementation (Paul Harrison)

CDS / GAVO Implementation (Gregory Mantelet)

VO Paris Implementation (Mathieu Servillat)

CADC Implementation (Pat Dowler)

Implementations Validators

No implementation validators for UWS 1.1, though CADC (and others?) have UWS 1.0 validators that still pass:

• CADC UWS 1.0 Validator: OpenCADC cadcTestUWS

• taplint TAP validator within stilts does non-exhaustive validation of the UWS v1.0 functionality of a TAP service: job submission, lifecycle tracking, deletion, job document parsing etc. See UWS Stage. If someone can point me at a running UWS 1.1-compliant TAP service (minimum: WAIT-blocking and job documents labelled version='1.1' ) I'll try to update the validation for it. -- MarkTaylor - 2015-07-03

Please add your validator (even if 1.0) if applicable.

RFC Review Period: 2015-06-30 - 2015-08-18

Comments from the IVOA Community during RFC period: 2015-06-30 - 2015-08-18

Example Comment (2015 June 30th) by BrianMajor

I comment on these three points:

• point 1
• point 2
• point 3

Comments from MarkTaylor

(Still) a good clearly written document. One or two minor comments/suggestions:

• Notation: I don't understand the usage of curly and round brackets in referencing URL path elements. For instance in sec 2.1.11 I see: "/{jobs}/{job-id}/parameters/(parameter-name)", and in sec 2.2: "/(jobs)/(jobid)", and in sec 2.2.1.1: "/{jobs}/(job-id)". Are () and {} doing different, ahem, jobs here? If not, can you just pick one or the other?
• Sec 1.3: "an XML document (e.g. ADQL, CEA [harrison05])" - is it anachronistic to refer to ADQL in this context since post-ADQL-2.0 there is no ADQL/X representation?
• Sec 2.1: A count indicator ("1") is missing from the Job-Owner link in the UML diagram
• Sec 2.1.3: The phases "HELD", "SUSPENDED" and "ARCHIVED" do not appear in the diagram.
• Sec 2.2: "future versions of this document will add other bindings such as SOAP." Really?
• Sec 2.2: "an non-existant job id" -> "a non-existent job-id"
• Sec 2.2.1.1: "it should not return a response (i.e. block)" is a bit ambiguous. Prefer "it should not return a response (i.e. it should block)"?
• Sec 2.2.1.1: "/{jobs}/(job-id)?WAIT&PHASE=QUEUED": I think it has to be "WAIT=<value>" not just "WAIT"?
• Sec 4.2: "ADQL [1] can serve as a JDL." - bibliography referencing is wrong.
• Sec 4.3: "Call it CEA v2 to distinguish it from CEA v1 as currently maintained by AstroGrid." - it's a bit anachronistic.
• Sec 4.3: "The JDL in CEA v2 is similar to that in CEA v1 It is a formal ..." - missing full stop
• Sec 4.3: "the emerging XForms technology" - is it still emerging?
• Schema: version attribute to be made optional? (see schema evolution discussion)

-- MarkTaylor - 2015-07-02