WD-DataLink-1.0

[Arnold Rots]

Actually, my reservation about the list is that it is precisely someone's
known/custom/esoteric metadata set.
It takes a very narrow view of the calibration scene.
It works nicely for optical imaging data, but that's about it.
Radio, high energy, and generally spectral data are poorly served.

Cheers,

  - Arnold

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arnold H. Rots                                          Chandra X-ray
Science Center
Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory                   tel:  +1 617 496
7701
60 Garden Street, MS 67                                      fax:  +1 617
495 7356
Cambridge, MA 02138
arots at cfa.harvard.edu
USA
http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~arots/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 1:31 PM, Patrick Dowler <
patrick.dowler at nrc-cnrc.gc.ca> wrote:

>
> I should note that the authors of the current WD recognise that this
> semantics column describing the role or meaning of a link is probably one
> of the key features and we did not think we could reach agreement without
> wide community input. The WD contains the simplest most abstract set of
> values, which we knew were not adequate.
>
> So, please post ideas here, but also keep in mind that the goal is not to
> find a place to put your known/custom/esoteric metadata: it is to enable
> the client of a datalink service to chose the right links.
>
> For example, if the client is going to download raw data and needs *all*
> the calibration files then simply having "science" and "calibration" would
> suffice to pick those links out. Now, if we also assume that the files need
> not be self-explanatory then lumping all calibration files together would
> not be sufficient to do the processing, but that is a distinct issue and
> maybe out of scope for datalink. I don't know where that line is, but I
> would hope that if I downloaded a raw science file and 3 calibration files
> from a data centre that I could figure out which was the dark, the bias,
> and the flat field (easy: it's been awhile since I reduced any data :-)
>
>
> Pat
>
>
> On 11/12/2013 04:48 PM, Tim Jenness wrote:
>
>>
>> On Nov 12, 2013, at 12:30 , Arnold Rots <arots at cfa.harvard.edu> wrote:
>>
>>  I think this list needs some serious consideration,
>>> particularly to make sure that the terms have
>>> general application and that coverage is complete.
>>>
>>> For instance, a radio beam image is no different
>>> from a PSF. And what is the relation between an
>>> error map and a noise map? How does that relate
>>> to a sensitivity map. What about an exposure map?
>>> And I thought it peculiar that the first item under
>>> ancillary contains miscellaneous calibration data;
>>> why isn't that under calibration? Also, the set of
>>> calibration data types seems rather limited.
>>>
>>> Let's not rush this list.
>>>
>>>
>> I agree completely with Arnold.
>>
>> In the submm you have a sky dip calibration observation for example.
>>
>> —
>> Tim Jenness
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> --
>
> Patrick Dowler
> Canadian Astronomy Data Centre
> National Research Council Canada
> 5071 West Saanich Road
> Victoria, BC V9A 2L9
>
> 250-363-0044 (office) 250-363-0045 (fax)
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.ivoa.net/pipermail/dal/attachments/20131113/d8021143/attachment.html>