search

valentinedwv / ioostech

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/ioostech
0 stars 0 forks source link

IOOS SOS Milestone 1.0 WSDD v0.9 #62

Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 8 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago 
Based on the Shane's feedback, I've updated the WSDD to v0.9 
(https://ioostech.googlecode.com/files/IOOS%20SOS%20WSDD%20Draft%20v0.9.docx). 
Shane, sorry for not fixing the abbreviated URN description in section 
4.2.2.3.2.2 "SWE-GetObservation Template" - I've just missed it, and will fix 
it in the very next release. Meanwhile, current version is pretty close to the 
final release, and I would appreciate team's review and comments. 

A couple of other Shane's suggestions were kind of controversial, and I believe 
that they deserve a discussion, even if it is going to be a short one. So, here 
are the moot points:

1. Should the ExtendedCapabilities property "softwareVersion" be mentioned and 
recommended (not mandatory) for GetCapabilities response?

Although I've inserted provision for that in the WSDD, I would like a team 
consensus on that.

2. Should "sml:capabilites" be used with the name="networkProcedures" for 
indicating station parent procedure the same way it is used with the 
name="stationProcedure" for sensors? Should it be made mandatory, optional, or 
is that name usage totally out of scope for the Milestone 1.0?

In my opinion it should be mandatory, while Shane seems to be inclined to 
optional. Opinions?

Original issue reported on code.google.com by abir...@gmail.com on 6 Nov 2013 at 8:34

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago 
[deleted comment]
GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago 
[deleted comment]
GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago 
I believe the software version field should be mandatory.  We will need this 
information in the upcoming system integration test.  

As for the parent procedure I feel less strongly about this. I can see that 
this is a very useful field but I'm not really able to predict the downside of 
making it mandatory.  Any other thoughts out there?

Original comment by dpsnowde...@gmail.com on 7 Nov 2013 at 4:09

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago 
OK, I replaced v0.9 with v0.91, which has several minor fixes, e.g. has 
abbreviated URN description fixed, etc. The updated link to the document is
https://ioostech.googlecode.com/files/IOOS%20SOS%20WSDD%20Draft%20v0.91.docx

Original comment by abir...@gmail.com on 7 Nov 2013 at 4:19