On Thu, 8 May 2003, Norman Gray wrote:
> Hello, all.
>
> I've prepared an HDX overview, which is currently sitting at
> <http://www.astro.gla.ac.uk/users/norman/star/java/hdx/>
>
> That is the line I plan to take on HDX in the IVOA talk, which I
> intend to write tomorrow. So:
Looks good to me.
>
> * Do you think this is the right line? I've tried to aim it at what I
> believe this audience to be (and you'll surely note that I haven't
> said `ontology' once, nor even `semantics', though I have at one
> point said `architecture'), but I'm not honestly confident that
> I've succeeded.
>
Yes.
> * I plan to at least read over it again tomorrow, but don't have
> current plans to rewrite or much extend it. So if there are any
> egregiously opaque bits, make sure I haven't glazed over them.
>
> * Unless folk shout otherwise, I plan to mention this overview
> on the [log in to unmask] mailing list tomorrow. I am relived that Tim
> also thinks this is a good idea.
>
Very good idea (just to repeat myself) :-)
> * It's not _completely_ clear to me how I demo this. I suppose I
> could give the SoG-plus-photom demo (if I can learn how to do it on
> Monday), and say, `this is passing HDX wrapped in SOAP, so look,
> we really _have_ written this code'. But is that really going to
> blow anyone away? The Treeview demo does show the structure, and
> is generally regarded as a Good Thing, so perhaps that would be saner.
>
Treeview demo at a bare minimum. You should probably make clear that your
system allows web services to simply pass around this meta data rather
than all the data.
> * That page points to my current version of the javadocs. I think
> we should have these pages on the www.starlink.ac.uk machine, if
> necessary by simply copying this set of pages over there. As Tim
> says, we should have a URL (and a stable one), which I can put in
> the slides for my talk, and tell folk about at the meeting.
>
> And no, I don't believe anyone _is_ giving a "By the way Starlink has a
> load of algorithm engines that can work as web services" talk. That was
> a bit of an omission, methinks. Should we have a word with Clive Page?
>
No comment from me.
--
Tim Jenness
JAC software
http://www.jach.hawaii.edu/~timj
|