Roy That makes things clearer - the documents can be interpreted a number of ways. I'll feed it in tomorrow.
Regards James On 20 October 2010 11:23, Lowry, Roy K <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello James, > > > > The suggestions were posted by me on the wiki for review by BGS and CEH > without dissent. There have been many discussions with Bryan over the > years. > > > > There are no more vocabulary servers in NERC to my knowledge. > > > > Both BODC and BGS have extensive vocabulary content embedded in their > relational database schemas that needs to be served. This content needs to > be on site to satisfy RDBMS management requirements such as referential > integrity constraints. It therefore makes sense to develop from where we are > now to a distributed model with uniform URI addressing and document syntax. > In other words, what looks to the user like a single vocabulary server > delivering content from multiple back-end stores. > > > > The alternative would be to develop infrastructure to hold synchronised > copies at both sites, which in itself would require vocabulary serving > infrastructure as well as bringing operational overheads and issues to the > table. Physically moving all BGS vocabularies (hundreds established) to > BODC and keeping them up to date would be a logistical nightmare. > > > > Cheers, Roy. > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *James Doughty > *Sent:* 20 October 2010 09:33 > > *To:* NERC DataGrid Technical List > *Subject:* [ndg-technical] SIS IA Vocabulary Server(s) > > > > Dear Vocabulary People > > > > I'm just preparing for the drafting meeting tomorrow and as such am going > through the submitted papers that are at > https://wiki.ceh.ac.uk/display/nsig/IA+Tasks, in particular: > > > > 3.1 Vocabularies Computational Viewpoint - this has prompted a couple of > questions on reading the "Implications for NERC Infrastructure Architecture" > section. It sounds like you are suggesting a number of deliverables for the > IA > > > > 1. A single (VS) document syntax for NERC > > 2. A common VS API. > > 3. A single interface browser/client to all vocabularies used > > 4. Conformance to SKOS2 > > > > I presume these suggestions have been agreed by the various research > centres during this period of consultation and drafting? > > > > You have also stated that there are currently 2 vocabulary services - I > presume that there are no more? > > > > Does this imply that one of the 2 NERC vocabulary services should be > retired/subsumed into the other etc and if so which one? If neither, then > presumably there is some justification for keeping both? > > > > Regards > > > > James > > > > > > -- > > James Doughty > Director > Diass Limited > 07985 443973 > > [email protected] > > > > -- > This message (and any attachments) is for the recipient only. NERC > is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the contents > of this email and any reply you make may be disclosed by NERC unless > it is exempt from release under the Act. Any material supplied to > NERC may be stored in an electronic records management system. > > _______________________________________________ > NDG-technical mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ncas.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ndg-technical > -- James Doughty Director Diass Limited 07985 443973 [email protected]
_______________________________________________ NDG-technical mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ncas.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ndg-technical
