[webservices] A question of location ID, how to represent empty IDs in XML?

[Joachim Saul]

Chad Trabant wrote on 31.07.2014 09:42:
> On Jul 31, 2014, at 12:33 AM, Joachim Saul <saul at gfz-potsdam.de> wrote:
>>> Has anyone observed this automatic trimming on any system?
>>
>> No, and I agree that a generic parser should return a raw string as it is in the XML without implicit trimming, nullifying etc. To obtain a trimmed string, it's trivial to trim() the input strings as needed. That's what's done in ObsPy, too.
>>
>> In fact even the *already* empty string location codes from libmseed are trimmed again at ObsPy level, just in case. ;)
>
> HI Joachim,
>
> You keep coming back to this as if it is meaningful.  libmseed and the parts of ObsPy getting information from libmseed are dealing with SEED data, where the current rules of parsing are clear.  What is your point exactly?

The point is that in libmseed you use a different empty location code naming than in StationXML. As I said a number of times, for me that's not a problem at all. Many clients can handle this and those that cannot can be modified easily. In particular, if you applied the same naming rules as in libmseed also in e.g. FetchData (by making a trivial change in the code) they would become consistent at a very low cost. It would be a benefit for the user.
  
> Why do you think the existing metadata and decades of SEED would need to be changed?  Please explain.

Because otherwise a mapping would be required "forever". Until at least very recently you were strongly against any mapping, even calling the idea "rubbish" at one point.

Joachim