Comments on VO-DML specification documents

This page aims to keep track of comments made about the VO-DML spec on this page in the WG discussion phase. Link to first entry in email list that starts the discussion. It also lists some open issues for which a particular choice was made, but where other choices could be preferrable.

Comments from DM mailing list and private communications

Open issues identified by editors/authors

  • Should VO-DMLs Model extend Package?
    Omar notes that this, together with XML schema usage of <sequence>, complicates hand-writing of models.
    ALso, it gives Model a vodml-id element, which can cause problems with the interpretation of that concept and its uniqueness requirements in a model. [Omar: It's more like the other way around. Needing vodml-id for Model is the issue. Also, the fact that the xmls now have imports as their latest element is an annoying consequence, and not only for those "hand-writing" models. I made a couple of suggestions on how to fix this, but I believe that in the end the best approach is to go back to the previous state]
Topic revision: r6 - 2014-05-11 - OmarLaurino
 
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platformCopyright © 2008-2019 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWiki? Send feedback