<div dir="ltr"><div><div><div><div><div>A variation on what Markus propose for provenance:<br></div>It would be useful if one could distinguish between<br></div>an original instance and a mirrored instance.<br></div><div>"mirror of" would be needed and should point to the original.<br></div>Note that mirroring is not the same as "derived from",<br>so one does need a separate term.<br></div><br></div> - Arnold<br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div dir="ltr">-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>Arnold H. Rots Chandra X-ray Science Center<br>Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory tel: +1 617 496 7701<br>60 Garden Street, MS 67 fax: +1 617 495 7356<br>Cambridge, MA 02138 <a href="mailto:arots@cfa.harvard.edu" target="_blank">arots@cfa.harvard.edu</a><br>USA <a href="http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~arots/" target="_blank">http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~arots/</a><br>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br><br></div></div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 6:50 AM, Markus Demleitner <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:msdemlei@ari.uni-heidelberg.de" target="_blank">msdemlei@ari.uni-heidelberg.de</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi Pat,<br>
<br>
Thanks for putting together this list.<br>
<br>
What I think is missing so far is the provenance axis. For instance,<br>
I'd like to express in a datalink for split-order Echelle spectrum<br>
where the merged order is found and vice versa. Also, without a raw<br>
file the calibration files we already descibe aren't terribly useful.<br>
<br>
Let me propose #derivation as a top-level label for the merged-order<br>
file in the split-order datalink. I can't see myself liking<br>
#predecessor or #ancestor for the files some reduced data set is<br>
derived from, so better ideas are solicited.<br>
<br>
Having #predecessor and #derivation (or whatever) would, I'd argue,<br>
do for now. Further details would be up to a proper provenance data<br>
model or actual software using those wonders.<br>
<br>
And then:<br>
<span class=""><br>
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 10:46:46AM +0100, Norman Gray wrote:<br>
> That's perfectly true -- there's no semantics attached to the<br>
> names. However it may be useful for debugging if nothing else, if<br>
> the names echo the structure, thus #preview, #preview-image,<br>
> #preview-plot and so on.<br>
<br>
</span>While in general I don't like giving terms structure, in *this<br>
particular* instance (preview) I believe Norman is right. "image"<br>
and "plot" are very generic, and reserving them for previews doesn't<br>
sound like a good idea to me.<br>
<br>
There's a difference to the remaining terms, e.g., for bias, dark,<br>
and flat -- these are terms that immediately have to do with<br>
calibrating images. And a cutout simply is some sort of processing<br>
product. However, not every sort of image is a preview, and hence it<br>
should be preview-image, previewImage, or preview_image<br>
<br>
$(#=% B ()%<br>
<br>
Sorry, I have to close here, people just drilled a hole in my ceiling<br>
to arrest me for needlessly instigating a syntax debate. As<br>
mitigating circumstance let me close with saying I'm for Norman's<br>
original preview-image and preview-plot.<br>
<br>
And that I don't think any of the other terms need prefixes.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
<br>
Markus<br>
<br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>