comment on wherewhen

[lesidaner]

VOEvent 2.0 incorporates STC 1.3, yet there's no mention of its compatibility with 2.1. Can we advocate for the adoption of RDF IVOA vocabularies from https://www.ivoa.net/rdf/, even though this link is discussed later in the text?

Including a list of triplets for astronomical coordinate systems seems impractical, especially considering potential evolution over time. Additionally, there's uncertainty about whether ICRS solely relies on the barycenter of the solar system; this aspect requires review by an expert.

Regarding the schema, the complex type "astrocoord" includes an element called "Name." Its usage is unclear; while the xs:documentation indicates it represents a "Named position for the event," "astrocoord" is also associated with "ObservatoryLocation." It would be beneficial to clarify this in the documentation.

In the fourth paragraph, it's worth noting that VOResource is now version 1.1, not 1.0.

[BaptisteCecconi]

Regarding the schema, the complex type "astrocoord" includes an element called "Name." Its usage is unclear; while the xs:documentation indicates it represents a "Named position for the event," "astrocoord" is also associated with "ObservatoryLocation." It would be beneficial to clarify this in the documentation.

This is fixed in 5925ed5

[BaptisteCecconi]

VOEvent 2.0 incorporates STC 1.3, yet there's no mention of its compatibility with 2.1. Can we advocate for the adoption of RDF IVOA vocabularies from https://www.ivoa.net/rdf/, even though this link is discussed later in the text?

There were other comments in the sense on the RFC page. I removed the statements for advocating because we should just say which vocabulary we use. Then it's the Semantics WG's job to propose new vocabularies.

[BaptisteCecconi]

Including a list of triplets for astronomical coordinate systems seems impractical, especially considering potential evolution over time. Additionally, there's uncertainty about whether ICRS solely relies on the barycenter of the solar system; this aspect requires review by an expert.

I understand (and I agree) that the astro_coords_id triplet is impractical for custom coordinate systems. I'm no expert on this topic, so I propose to keep things as they were in v2.0. I included a statement about explicit definition of coordinate systems.

[BaptisteCecconi]

In the fourth paragraph, it's worth noting that VOResource is now version 1.1, not 1.0.

I think this paragraph has been removed