Coordinates model - Working draft.
Rob Seaman
seaman at lpl.arizona.edu
Fri Jan 11 20:50:04 CET 2019
You guys squabbling make me feel young again ;-)
Note that commercial reference clocks are themselves pretty far from
ISO-8601, with settings for IEEE-1344, etc.
Is there a persuasive argument for why IVOA shouldn't mandate a binary
timestamp standard? For that matter, the FITS language is mostly driven
by Y2K era ASCII keywords. Nothing about FITS forbids encoding metadata
into a binary table structure (let alone VOtables). What would minimal
best usage be for timing metadata in a binary format? Could consensus be
reached if IVOA just ditched the grotty ASCII / UTF-8?
Rob
--
On 1/11/19 12:30 PM, Arnold Rots wrote:
> And this is precisely the part of ISO 8601 that does not make sense in
> astronomy: the exclusive choice between a time zone and UTC. Hence,
> the community has accepted a limited version of the ISO 8601 value
> string which is required to be associated with a specification of the
> time coordinate frame (including a time scale).
> See FITS WCS Paper IV.
>
> Cheers,
>
> - Arnold
>
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2019, 17:11 Graham, Matthew J. <mjg at caltech.edu
> <mailto:mjg at caltech.edu> wrote:
>
> The ISO 8601 spec is very clear: "The zone designator
> is empty if use is made of local
> time in accordance with 4.2.2.2 through 4.2.2.4,
> it is the UTC designator [Z] if
> use is made of UTC of day in
> accordance with 4.2.4 and it is the
> difference-component if use is made of
> local time and the difference from UTC
> in accordance with 4.2.5.2.” If you don’t use the zone
> designator as in the standard then it’s not ISO 8601.
>
> — Matthew
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.ivoa.net/pipermail/dm/attachments/20190111/417021f6/attachment.html>
More information about the dm
mailing list