Ticket #294 (closed issue: fixed)

Opened 13 years ago

Last modified 13 years ago

[DS][M] CSML collections in exist - standard name required?

Reported by: selatham Owned by: domlowe
Priority: discussion Milestone: PostAlpha_review
Component: CSML Version:
Keywords: Cc:

Description

Do we need a standard name for CSML storage as a collection the exist db?

Ecogrid, BODC are storing their CSML within an exist db as a handy place to put it. BADC are considering it. Are there real ndg requirements for this? If so do we need a standard name for the collection where they will be stored?

Change History

comment:1 Changed 13 years ago by selatham

Response to Ecogrid & BODC:- "There is no standard collection name for CSML at the moment. ndg_csml sounds reasonable to me. We could potentially have other forms of 'A' metadata used within ndg but we would have to keep them separate and have different Xqueries to suit their different structure anyway."

So ndg_csml is a suggestion in case we ever do need to do ndg Xquerying.

comment:2 Changed 13 years ago by domlowe

  • Status changed from new to assigned

comment:3 Changed 13 years ago by selatham

  • Milestone changed from PreBeta to PostAlpha_review

Dom's comments:- there's no reason I can see why we can't agree on a standard name for the collection before BADC decides whether or not to use exist.

I'm happy with "ndg_csml" as Sue suggests.

Although perhaps "ndg_A_csml" would be better. Then we could have "ndg_A_cdml" or "ndg_A_gml" etc..

comment:4 Changed 13 years ago by selatham

We currently use ndg_B_metadata for the MOLES collection. So ndg_A_csml etc sounds good to me. Will queries need to know the collection name?

comment:5 Changed 13 years ago by domlowe

  • Status changed from assigned to closed
  • Resolution set to fixed

Ticket closed: Agreed on "ndg_A_csml" as a standard collection name for CSML data.

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.