[Fwd: orthogonality (was Re: New attempt)]

• To: THREDDS <thredds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
• Subject: [Fwd: orthogonality (was Re: New attempt)]
• From: Benno Blumenthal <benno@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
• Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 16:10:12 -0400

--------------09A1DFD0D0524DE2E39D77B3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi John,

access and entry are not peer elements:  access is subordinate to entry.


The point we wanted to make is that an entry exists whether or not it can be
accessed, and there can be a number of different accesses for an given
entry.    If that number is zero, you call it a collection, if that number is
greater than zero, you call it a dataset, if you want the things that you are
talking about to be independent of protocol, you call them the same thing, in
this case entry.

Personally, I think the case is overwhelming that collection be dropped.  Makes
more sense to call what is left a dataset than an entry, but obviously it is
isomorphic to what is needed, so for a machine readable document I can hardly
complain.

Benno

--
Dr. M. Benno Blumenthal          benno@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
International Research Institute for climate prediction
Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University
Palisades NY 10964-8000                  (845) 680-4450



--------------09A1DFD0D0524DE2E39D77B3