Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- open:wp4:wp4techforum5:hackathon [2019/02/28 07:19]
bonnarel
+++ open:wp4:wp4techforum5:hackathon [2019/03/04 09:51] (current)
morten
@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 I ) ObsCore and other VO standards in the context of EST and solar data
-Participants Morten Frantz, Marco Guenter, Thomas Hederer, François Bonnarel
+Participants Morten Franz, Thomas Hederer, Carl Schaffer, François Bonnarel
 Discussion was about how Solar data can be described and discovered using an ObsCOre/EPNTAP strategy.
@@ Line 44: / Line 44: @@
 **Wednesday 27 th at 2 PM : Tme Series + time //Salle de réunion downstairs//**
-Ada, Mireille, Laurent, Marco (?) , Markus (?),François, Dave (?) to discuss  TimeSeries next steps.
+attendants: Carlos Rodrigo, Markus Demleitner, Marco Molinaro, Mark Taylor, Stelios Voutsinas, Margarida Castro Neves, François-Xavier Pineau, Matthieu Baumann, Mireille Louys, Francois Bonnarel, Sebastien Derriere, Zheng Meyer-Zhao, Thomas Boch, Laurent Michel, Gilles Landais, Dave Morris, Ada Nebot
-   Topics :
+topics discussed: Discovery and Data Model
-           DAL access
+{{:open:wp4:wp4techforum5:20190228-time-series-summary.pdf|20190228-time-series-summary}}
-           Mapping
+topic need for further discussion and didn't have the time
-           Utypes
+{{:open:wp4:wp4techforum5:timeserieshackhaton.pdf| DM annotation and utypes (focusing on data part)}}
-{{:open:wp4:wp4techforum5:timeserieshackhaton.pdf| The slides you avoided on the need for DM annotation ... and utypes (focusing on data part)}}
 **Wednesday 27 th at 4 PM : Provenance next steps Salle de Cours**
@@ Line 109: / Line 105: @@
 Francoise (not available during Tuesday 26 Hack-a-Thon), Marco + ...
+** Tuesday 16: Transition to ADQL 2.1 **
+Participants: Markus D., Mark T., Grégory, Stelios, Dave + others
+Topic: How should servers and clients behave with respect to
+minor version-sharp LANG parameters in TAP queries?
+There is now ADQL 2.1, and services want to accept LANG=ADQL-2.1 (as per
+TAP).  Should they accept LANG=ADQL-2.0, too.  Should they declare
+version 2.0 in TAPRegExt?
+Should we care about minor versions at all? Mark's use case: Syntax
+highlighting.  There already is a language selector in TOPCAT, filled
+from language/version from TAPRegExt.
+But then there's  people with hacked scripts not looking at TAPRegExt,
+perhaps just passing in LANG=ADQL-2.0 as gleaned from TAP.  Should this
+work on a 2.1 only service?  Yes, because there's no way it could
+(regularly) fail (ADQL 2.0 is a strict subset of ADQL 2.1).
+Should an ADQL-2.1 server declare support for 2.0 in TAPRegExt?  Mark
+thinks he'd not turn off syntax highlighting just because he doesn't
+know a version.  Mark would prefer no separate declaration if the
+behaviour is actually the same; users would worry about a meaningless
+decision.  It's a different thing if there's actually a behavioural
+difference.  So: No 2.0 declaration unless there's actually different
+parsers behind it.
+Have a versioning explanation in the ADQL spec: If you're a client and a
+service only declares support for a newer minor version than you know,
+use the latest artefacts you know about and hope for the best.  Also
+advse to leave out the version completely unless there's a strong reason
+to specify it (as in: when using new features in a cross-service query
+to fail early -- perhaps)..
+ADQL-2.2 to a ADQL-2.1 service: most likely it'd work because most
+people won't use the new versions.  Even if it fails, perhaps "I don't
+support DISTINCT ON" might be more useful than "I don't support ADQL
+.2".  But then: people who do this kind of thing should be able to read
+"Just cut away the version number" error message, and this concrete
+information might be useful in other use cases.  So: Fail with higher
+versions.

ASTERICS Wiki pages

User Tools

Site Tools

Differences

Page Tools