This archive contains answers to questions sent to Unidata support through mid-2025. Note that the archive is no longer being updated. We provide the archive for reference; many of the answers presented here remain technically correct, even if somewhat outdated. For the most up-to-date information on the use of NSF Unidata software and data services, please consult the Software Documentation first.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Wielgosz" <address@hidden> To: "John Caron" <address@hidden> Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 12:05 PM Subject: Re: latest Catalog XML > Hi John, > > This version resolves all of my major issues vis-a-vis > dataset/collection semantics. > > I only have two significant comments: > > 1) I see that DataType/MetadataType/ServiceType definitions are > unchanged. We've already been over some of the issues here so I won't > restate them - I assume dealing with this is being postponed to a future > revision. yeah, its pretty much postponed. We have an "Other" type, and I think you can override the ENTITY declarations. Also I am starting to look at XML Schema to see how this can be better done. I think we will have to revisit this. It would be good to accumulate some use cases. > > 2) I don't see the justification for the "property" tag. It seems like > this is a duplication of basic XML functionality. > > I.e. if you want to add THREDDS-parseable information about dataset > elements later on, you can just add XML attributes to the dataset tag, > as you have done for the "dataType" and "authority" fields. So I'm not > sure what you gain by adding your own generic tag whose "meaning" is > that it is really just an attribute. The problem is that you cant add an XML attribute without changing the DTD. So a property is a way to add non-standard attributes. Im not sure it will be useful. > > My remaining issues with the DTD are all just details that I can live > with. So that's it.. thanks for sticking with it. I am working through a Java object model to see what problems arise.