<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Hi All,<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">here are my thoughts on this, and derive from my definition of of the terms.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">* Fundamentally a “calibrator” is not a progenitor, but it is a modifier of the progenitor(s) to create the progeny</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">this rules out any solutions that;</div><div class=""> - point to calibrator files as “#progenitor”</div><div class=""> - have #calibration as a child of #progenitor in the vocabulary.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">the consequences of this are</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">* #calibration links do not make the distinction between “can be used” and “was used” - either could be true.</div><div class="">* the distinction between raw and calibrated data is made with another piece of metadata.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I think that this is sufficient, because, as has been pointed out earlier in this thread, in order to really redo calibration with most modern instrumentation would require more detailed provenance anyway.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">This does mean some change to <a href="https://www.ivoa.net/rdf/datalink/core/2020-09-02/datalink.html" class="">https://www.ivoa.net/rdf/datalink/core/2020-09-02/datalink.html</a> but different wording to that proposed in VEP6</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Regards,<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span></div><div class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Paul.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">p.s. to support my definition of calibrator and progenitor above - you can create a poor quality image of your target source without the calibration data, but you cannot create such an image from the calibration data alone.</div></body></html>