Is it worth expanding the data availability in the next StationXML to
include multiple data centers? For example, suppose:
has metadata for all of network XX
has waveforms for station XX.AAA but not XX.BBB
has information of data availability for station XX.BBB at dataCenterB
has waveforms for station XX.BBB
Then it would be useful to the client when getting metadata about network
XX from dataCenterA to learn about the availability of waveforms at
dataCenterB for XX.BBB.
Perhaps DataAvailabilityType should be expanded to include a service
reference, maybe as an xlink:href attribute? Their can already be multiple
DataAvailability elements allowing multiple datacenters.
On Aug 5, 2015, at 12:32 PM, Philip Crotwell <crotwell<at>seis.sc.edu> wrote:
Is it worth expanding the data availability in the next StationXML to include multiple data centers? For example, suppose:
Not a bad idea from the user's perspective but this would require any given data center to know the availability at other centers that have the data. So far there is not much exchange of that information.
While I'm a supporter of having data availability noted in StationXML, more detailed time series availability probably belongs elsewhere. I think this is a feature that a future FDSN federation system should address.