Facility and instrument terms in the different protocols

[CresitelloDittmar, Mark]

All,

I'd like to add the "DatasetMetadata" model to the list of
relevant documents.  It is to be the structured model of which ObsCore is a
view and also contains these concepts.
I haven't been in that model in some time, but I recall comparing the
various definitions within the DM models when deriving the definitions used
there.
  * DatasetMetadata "Facility" definition:
         "The Facility performing the observation.  This is modeled as a
Role played by a particular Organization"
  * DatasetMetadata "Instrument" definition:
         "The instrument used to create the data.  This can be a specific
instrument, general type or something else, such as a program in the case
of theoretical data."

The Dataset model uses a Party/Role relation to define the Facility
itself.  This was a lean toward tie-in with Provenance, and while that may
be overkill, it shows that this is definitely thinking of Facility as an
Organization and not a piece of hardware.
For space-based data, I can see 3 layers on this:
   o The organization overseeing/controlling the observation (CXC
Operations Center)
   o The hardware/telescope (Chandra X-Ray Observatory)
   o The instrument/detector (ACIS or HRC)

I don't have strong opinions in this area, and can adopt whatever comes
from this discussion.

Mark



On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 1:04 PM Tamara Civera <tcivera at cefca.es> wrote:

> Dear DAL, Registry,
>
> I am writing to you due to the definitions of the terms/fields "facility"
> and "instrument" used in the different protocols Obscore, SIAP v 2.0 and
> VoDataService. I have found that the current ones can cause confusion,
> especially the "facility" term (I send attached a "facility_name" list from
> different Observatories Obscore services and in some, this field contains
> the observatory name, in other the telescope name,...). So I propose to
> clarify and unify them in these protocols.
>
> Current "Facility" definition according to the different VO protocols
> documentation:
>
>    - Obscore "Facility" definition:
>    - "B7.1 The Facility class codes information about the observatory or
>       facility used to collect the data."
>       - "C.3 <FIELDname="facility_name"datatype="char"ucd="meta.id;
>       instr.tel"utype="obscore:Provenance.ObsConfig.Facility.name"xtype="adql:VARCHAR"arraysize="128*"><DESCRIPTION>telescope
>       name</DESCRIPTION></FIELD>"
>    - SIAP 2.0 "Facility" definition: "2.1.12 The FACILITY parameter is a
>    string-valued parameter that specifies the name of the facility (usually
>    telescope) where the data was acquired. The value is compared with the
>    facility_name from the ObsCore [7] data model"
>    - VoDataService "Facility" definition: "3.1.1 The observatory or
>    facility used to collect the data contained or managed by this resource."
>
>
> Current "Instrument" definition according to the different VO protocols
> documentation:
>
>
>    - Obscore "Instrument" definition: "B7.2 The name of the instrument
>    used for the acquisition of the observation."
>    - SIAP 2.0 "Instrument" definition: "2.1.13 The INSTRUMENT parameter
>    is a string-valued parameter that specifies the name of the instrument with
>    which the data was acquired. The value is compared with the instrument_name
>    from the ObsCore [7] data model."
>    - VoDataService "Instrument" definition: "3.1.1 The instrument used to
>    collect the data contain or managed by a resource."
>
> After discussing this topic with Markus Demleitner in the IVOA
> Interoperability Meeting, we have thought these possible definitions for
> facility and instrument:
>
> "Facility" should contain the name of the device that collected the
> messenger particles (as opposed to the detector, which is in
> "instrument").  In the optical, this would usually designate a telescope,
> in the radio, it would be a dish or an array, for space missions, usually
> the whole probe.
>
> "Instrument" should contain the name of the device used for analysing and
> detecting the messenger particles. Instances of such devices would include
> cameras, spectrographs, or particle detectors.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tamara Civera
> --
> Tamara Civera Lorenzo
> Scientific Database and Web Access Engineer
> [image: Logotipo CEFCA] *Centro de Estudios de Física del Cosmos de
> Aragón*
>
>    - Plaza San Juan nº 1, piso 2º
>    - 44001 Teruel
>    - Tfno: +34978221266 - Ext: 1116
>    - Fax: +34978602334
>    - Email: tcivera at cefca.es
>    - Url: http://www.cefca.es
>
> Este correo electrónico y, en su caso, cualquier archivo adjunto al
> mismo, contiene información de carácter confidencial exclusivamente
> dirigida a su destinatario. Queda prohibida su divulgación, copia o
> distribución a terceros sin la previa autorización escrita de nuestra
> entidad. En el caso de haber recibido este correo electrónico por
> error, por favor, elimínelo de inmediato y notifique esta circunstancia
> al remitente. En conformidad con lo establecido en las normativas vigentes
> de Protección de Datos a nivel nacional y europeo, le informamos que en la
> Fundación CEFCA tenemos un interés legítimo para tratar sus datos de
> contacto con la finalidad de informarle de nuestras actividades y gestionar
> sus peticiones.  Sus datos no serán cedidos a terceros, y los conservaremos
> sólo mientras sea necesario para el mantenimiento de nuestra relación o
> la gestión de su solicitud. Puede ejercer sus derechos de
> acceso, rectificación y supresión de sus datos, así como los derechos de
> limitación y oposición a su tratamiento con fines promocionales,
> escribiendo a rgpd at cefca.es. También puede dirigirse a nuestro Delegado
> de Protección de Datos para cualquier consulta relacionada con nuestra
> política de privacidad, escribiendo a dpd at cefca.es .
> ------------------------------
> This email and, when appropriate, any file attached to it, contains
> confidential information exclusively addressed to its recipient. It is
> forbidden the disclosure, copying or distribution of this email to third
> parties without the prior written authorization of our entity. Should you
> have received this email by mistake, please delete it immediately and
> notify the sender of this circumstance. According to the provisions of
> current Data Protection regulations at national and European level, we
> inform you that at CEFCA we have a legitimate interest to process your
> contact data in order to inform you of our activities and manage your
> requests. Your data will not be transferred to third parties, and we will
> keep it only as long as it is necessary for the maintenance of our
> relationship or the management of your request. You can exercise your
> rights of access, rectification and deletion of your data, as well as the
> rights of limitation and opposition to its treatment for promotional
> purposes, by writing to rgpd at cefca.es. You can also contact our Data
> Protection Officer for any query related to our privacy policy, writing to
> dpd at cefca.es .
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.ivoa.net/pipermail/registry/attachments/20220427/f108ab37/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: logo.png
Type: image/png
Size: 3470 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.ivoa.net/pipermail/registry/attachments/20220427/f108ab37/attachment-0001.png>