[OBSERVATION]Observation data model/comments/Resolution...
Mireille Louys
louys at newb6.u-strasbg.fr
Wed May 19 09:38:54 PDT 2004
Jonathan McDowell wrote:
>
Hi Martin, I all,
>
> I'd like to ask Mireille to comment on the following which I think
> apply to her diagrams:
>
> >
> > 2) If Resolution and Precision really might 'belong to' many different
> > Characterisations, we need to make sure they are immutable.
what is this ? a kind of constant value? sorry , not clear to me .
> On the other
> > hand, we could say one Resolution/Precision instance can only belong to one
> > Characterisation which might be neater and seems more correct somehow -
It is the case I think, for images at least . The Observed image have
Characterisation descriptors , among them
a Resolution component, a SamplePrecision component that are determined by:
the instrumental chain and the data reduction pipeline.
If a new reduction algo is developped, a new Observation will be produced with
updated values for Characterisation compents.
For a spectrum, this is probably the same situation.
For a list of extracted sources , we have to check.
>
> > presumably Characteristics normally have different resolutions?
> > 3) Is ObservingConfiguration itself the ObsEltList? What benefits do we
> > get from having a separate List?
> >
I can hook another Object: "Ambient conditions " for example under
ObservingConfiguration,
that can describe the instrumental parameters values for this Observation shot.
There could be more informations to store than just the list of elements.
cheers, mireille.
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Mireille LOUYS mailto:Mireille.Louys at astro.u-strasbg.fr
L S I I T Observatoire de Strasbourg
Ecole Nationale Superieure 11, Rue de l'Universite
de Physique de Strasbourg, 67000 STRASBOURG
Boulevard Sébastien Brant, BP 10413
67412 ILLKIRCH Cedex
Tel: 03 90 24 44 94 Tel: 03 90 24 24 34
--------------------------------------------------------------
More information about the dm
mailing list