Update service info description for refget.sequence and refget.secol

[tcezard]

This PR clarifies the artifacts used to describe refget.sequence and refget.seqcol and add a concrete example of what the service info payload should look like for a sequence collection server

[jmarshall]

Note in particular (the second half of) this, from my previous comment on your TASC PR, ga4gh/TASC#48 (comment):

In this case I would expect to see the proposed artifact values listed in the service-info parts of the respective specs, and for the renaming in the sequence protocol I'd expect to see a discussion of older servers returning "type": { "group": "org.ga4gh", "artifact": "refget", … } in their service-info responses.

[jmarshall]

BTW what is the implementation status of these service-info artifact values? Are there already (perhaps beta) deployed servers that return "artifact": "refget.sequence" or "artifact": "refget.seqcol"?

[sveinugu]

Added two comments that might be taken under consideration. But also ok with this just as it is.

[sveinugu]

Shouldn't this really be a functioning URL where we share our base schema? I believe we discussed this some time ago, and I suspect we put this on the TODO list for things to do after v1.0. Which is fine for me. However, perhaps some comment should be added about this?

[sveinugu]

Update: It is already commented in the spec:

The base seqcol schema will be made available as the spec is finalized.

I believe we are finalizing the spec right now, so perhaps this is the time to make the schema available as a separate JSON document?

[sveinugu]

Or refget.sequences?

[nsheff]

BTW what is the implementation status of these service-info artifact values? Are there already (perhaps beta) deployed servers that return "artifact": "refget.sequence" or "artifact": "refget.seqcol"?

My prototype attempts to use it, here's the code: https://github.com/refgenie/refget/blob/95355beb51e5f4f266c8e14d67f0dee9ccaf75b6/seqcolapi/main.py#L77-L96

The deployed demo API itself is down at the moment pending recent updates, but I'll try to get it running again today so you can see it in action

[jmarshall]

It's not that I want to see it in action. Instead I'm trying to gauge whether there would be any practicality in altering the artifact values to comply with TASC's guidelines for them, as discussed in comments on ga4gh/TASC#48.

[nsheff]

Oh -- it's no problem at all for us to change the existing services to comply with the TASC guidelines.

In mtg today we agreed to use refget-sequence and refget-seqcol

[jmarshall]

An excellent outcome IMHO — thanks very much for addressing this.