Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

It is not possible to query SIA services by MOC #9

Open
Bonnarel opened this issue May 11, 2020 · 1 comment
Open

It is not possible to query SIA services by MOC #9

Bonnarel opened this issue May 11, 2020 · 1 comment

Comments

@Bonnarel
Copy link
Collaborator

Bonnarel commented May 11, 2020

MOC (as well as STMOC, and maybe STEMOC) has proven to be a very efficient way to describe coverage of data and is used for discovery of data. It has been often discussed and also during last interop that it should be useful to query SIA services by MOC ? It should probably be with a new parameter and not via POS considering that it is probably more useful to have STMOC or STEMOC, than spatial MOC alone. This is also valid for SODA of course (ivoa-std/SODA#5). I wonder if this new parameter should not be standardized by DALI

@Bonnarel Bonnarel mentioned this issue Apr 26, 2022
@pdowler
Copy link
Collaborator

pdowler commented Apr 26, 2022

Since WD-DALI-1.2 defines a "moc" xtype, I support adding a MOC param to go along with the other axis query params. It is true that the "overlap" of a MOC param and POS, BAND, TIME is non-trivial.

Also, WD-DALI-1.2 refers to MOC-1.x (spatial moc) so we'll need to revisit that and decide if we need 1 or more moc xtype(s).

I also agree we should consider this together with SODA axis params and figure out if it's worth defining them in a single common place (DALI). My gut feeling is thatb we can keep SIA (SDA) and SODA consistent without that, but if there is a 3rd use of these params then maybe refactoring to DALI is a good idea.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants