Unification between the extension `type` and `mode`

[bkhelifi]

There is a wide discussion about the use of the extension type or mode for the fields: tracking, scan, pointing and analysis.

In one hand, we wish for the user that all ObsCore tables use the same extension. In other hand, one should consider the radio extension choices. And maybe, with a lowest priority, a harmonization with ObsTAP might be desirable.

So, what to choose?

[loumir]

There is a wide discussion about the use of the extension type or mode for the fields: tracking, scan, pointing and analysis.

In one hand, we wish for the user that all ObsCore tables use the same extension. In other hand, one should consider the radio extension choices. And maybe, with a lowest priority, a harmonization with ObsTAP might be desirable.

So, what to choose?

Minor correction here:
Probably you are mentioning ObsLocTAP, where the tracking of the instrument on sources is called "tracking_type"
I have checked the implementation of the radio_ extension for evn : it uses currently "tracking_mode" .
The compatibility of the terms "tracking_?" seems to me easier to change in ObsLocTAP and to homogenize
all instrumental terms with "-mode" for Radio and HEIG extension .

how many ObsLocTAP services do we have in place ?

[molinaro-m]

Following (somehow) the recipe in ObsLocTAP Sec.5, and trying it also on WIRR@GAVO, it seems there's only 1 ObsLocTAP registered in the IVOA: ivo://esavo/isla/obsloctap

[loumir]

Thanks Marco .
So it seems easier to keep tracking_mode everywhere.