improve separation of schemas from the APIs

[kozbo]

From @haussler
why is almost everything a "message"? I am really hoping to separate schemas from APIs. I see objects defined of type enum, which seem like healthy schemas. But all structured objects seem to be "messages", which suggests web API and not general data schema. Also, can we separate out the services, like "sequence_annotation_service", which are clearly web API, from the data schemas like "struct" and "common" which are data schemas?

[mbaudis]

I am very much +n on @haussler 's comments. I would support moving all web API parts to a different repository.
This would also greatly facilitate the schema development, which could move ahead in a more productive pace. I'm not so happy about having the dev. fine tailored to a given concept of web API handling.

[mbaudis]

... also, we had some discussions on how to coordinate Beacon with the GA4GH schema; and one obstacle clearly is the current "proto w/ methods" style to handle things.

[david4096]

I think we can close this without moving the datamodel to a new repository.

One alternative would be to address #815 and this one by moving things around in the repository and clarifying the documentation. We could have ga4gh.schemas.datamodel and ga4gh.schemas.methods both presented from within this repository.

[mbaudis]

I'm +1 regarding ga4gh.schemas.datamodel and ga4gh.schemas.methods. The current mix is awkward; and splitting in different repos may be detrimental to the required coherence, due to the varying nature/maturity/activity of all the other repositories collected under ga4gh.