ObsCore and extensions
Mireille LOUYS
mireille.louys at unistra.fr
Mon Jan 20 11:48:03 CET 2025
Hi Markus and all,
One precision here, included in the text.
Mireille
Le 20/01/2025 à 09:56, Markus Demleitner via dm a écrit :
> Dear Colleagues,
>
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 02:48:19PM +0100, BONNAREL FRANCOIS gmail via dm wrote:
>>> t_exp_min
>>> t_exp_max
>> It could be useful for time series outside the radio domain, right. It's in
>> the proposal for time extension too. I am not sure if it's useful outside
>> time series. I let Mireille and other Time extension authors comment on this
> Ah, hm... this point made me think. What happens if the same column
> is present in multiple extensions? I frankly would have hoped that
> we can avoid that and carefully design the different extensions such
> that only concepts specific to the the extension will be part of it.
The idea used in the Time extension and radio extension notes is to
define a field in only one extension table .
The Obscore extension note for radio data does not include /t_exp_min ,
t_exp_max /
theses have been proposed in the Obscore Time extension .
In the case of pulsar data , 2 extensions are needed : the radio one
and the time one .
Then we can use queries using the natural join as proposed by Mark
Kettenis at the last interop in the radio session ( see Mark's
presentation).
> Realistically, this will not be possible; people interested in an
> extension will in general want to be able to do with one extension or
> two at the max, and they in particular will not want to wait for
> updates of other extensions, let alone Obscore itself.
>
> The question is what to do then. I see two possible ways out:
>
> (a) use different column names. But sure, it would suck if the upper
> limit of exposure times of the artifacts within a data product (say)
> had different names in radio, time domain, and high energy,
> respectively.
in that case it breaks the interoperability that Obscore was offering :
the idea is one metadata keyword , one meaning , one value , one type .
>
> (b) make it a strict validation requirement that the values in
> different extensions compare exactly equal (which may not be an easy
> feat for floating point numbers). If we do that, our NATURAL JOIN
> recipe for pulling in the extension will automatically do the right
> thing.
>
> Opinions? Alternatives?
>
> -- Markus
>
My 2 cents ,
best , Mireille
--
--
Mireille Louys, MCF (Associate Professor)
Centre de données CDS Images, Laboratoire ICube &
Observatoire de Strasbourg Telecom Physique Strasbourg
11 rue de l'Université 300, Bd Sebastien Brandt CS 10413
F- 67000-STRASBOURG F-67412 ILLKIRCH Cedex
Tel: +33 3 68 85 24 34
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.ivoa.net/pipermail/dm/attachments/20250120/7fff71db/attachment.htm>
More information about the dm
mailing list