<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
bonjour Baptiste , hi all, <br>
I am wondering whteher this should go in the UCD discussion or in
the Obscore/EPN Tap discussion . <br>
in Obscore the "dataproduct_ type" column in TAP will allow to
specify an image as <br>
<i>dataproductype=image</i><br>
<i>dataproduct_ subtype= map (or map global)</i> will allow to
distinguish various cases of images.<br>
This vocabulary is free and you can build your own for the Vespa
community and coll. <br>
<br>
What would be the benefit of a ucd in that case ? I am not sure it
is really useful.<br>
Eager to check serialisation examples if available.<br>
<br>
Cheers, Mireille.<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Le 22/06/2016 à 23:14, Baptiste Cecconi
via RT a écrit :<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:rt-4.4.0-6055-1466630064-336.311-4-0@obspm.fr"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
We've he'd a discussion within the VESPA team yesterday, and we would like to
have a way to distinguish an image (obs.image) from a image that has been
mapped onto planetary body surface, or more generally, map-projected (with no
specification of the projection mapping). This is a nice-to-have for separating
between raw images and map-projected images, which are generally mentioned as
"derived" products in the processing level, with specification of the type of
derivation.
Then we also need a term that says that the mapped image is covering the full
surface of the body. That would be very useful to be able to identify images
that can be used for planetary background maps (such as in the Io volcano use
case by Sébastien Derrière).
Our proposal is thus be to add 2 sub-term to obs.image:
Q | obs.image.map | Image that has been map-projected
Q | obs.image.map.global | Global map-projected image of an 3D object, or of
the sky.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>