what we talked about:


Outline SimDB/DM note:

1. executive summary -> hand over to Herve Point to "Conclusion/How to proceed" section 
2. history and motivation -> hand over to Herve 
3. Overview modeling effort, justification of results. -> one more pass by me, then  -> hand over to Herve 
4. Overview actual proposal: -> check wrt HTML? -> Propose that I make a pass over this, then  -> hand over to Herve
  We need a proper JPG representation of the UML as accompanying doc
  - packages can be shortened to explanation/justification why use a package
  - Root entity classes and collection hierarchies 5. Dependencies other IVOA efforts: write a short intro to "why this section". ->GL
    Get email from Bob Hanisch with dependencies.
  - Registry: SimDB/DM as model for SimDB which is almost a registry.
    - Registry data model has similarities.
    - SimDB/DM as source for a Registry extension schema
  - Semantics: use their efforts, use of "broadest SKOS concept"
    - justification for which SKOS vocabularies we need.
  - DM: overlap with other models, 
    - our approach might be followed by other DM efforts.
    - Characterisation: StatisticalSummary is similar but not equivalent to Characterisation concept.
    Both have common super concept (as suggested in "Domain Model for Characterisation"
  - UTYPE: propose particular standard for linking UTYPE to data model.    
6. Issues->to mailing/discussion list? Parts maybe to Frank's document on mappings/use cases.
    Parts to "Use of SimDB/DM".
7. Serializations (part of a DM description) -> GL
  - UTYPE: how derived (why derived)
  - XSD: style, link to Registry, VOTable style, how derived, 8. Ideas how to use the model: here or in a note? 
  - direct: SimDB as registry: XML documents, no interface defined.
            SimDB/TAP: only query interface defined. Problems->too normalized, too much problems with quantities
  - SimDAL->SimTAP : 1 TAP schema per Protocol; TAP/PQL as similar to S3?
  - get rid of S3
  - Registry extension schema for a service

NEW: Conclusion: How to proceed towards a specification. -> HW

9. References need cleaning up and reordering -> Both
  - links must be relinked not to point to Volute forever.

Appendix A can go->separate document attached to UML, proposed to DM as Note?
Appendix B can go, Franck's document takes it place.


TODO
- Add conclusions section, containing some description of different documents to be produced for Spec.
WAS List of all external products accompanying this Note. See also section
1.5 from http://www.ivoa.net/Documents/DocStd/20100413/REC-DocStd-1.2.pdf
  . MagicDraw XMI file.
  . a PNG or JPG version of the main diagram (in case MagicDraw not available)/PDF zoomable (HW)
  . intermediate representation(+ its schema)
  . HTML documentation with UTYPEs
  . XML Schema documents

- TAG UML and HTML: First one quick read through by GL.
  Then send email to "tiger team" for comments. 

- When writing WD, use preamble plus generated details, ala 

  http://www.ivoa.net/Documents/REC/ReR/VOResource-20080222.html