Re: Characterisation draft

From: <louys-at-alinda.u-strasbg.fr>
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 22:39:33 +0200


Dear Anita,

> Mireille:

>>
Sorry if I was unclear here:
I just wanted the things concerning Axis to be described first, and then Coverage, because it is the order we can illustrate in the XML Schema.

Something like this:

AXES   A description should provide at least one axis ("AxisFrame", "Axis").

  The unit and coordsystem 'must' be given for each Axis present (these   may be relative to an internal reference only, e.g. (x,y) spatial   coordinates. In such a case the Location and Bounds 'must' be given on   that axis).

  All three of the Space, Time and Spectral Coverage Axes 'should' be   given\footnote{some might be considered irrelevant for simulated data, or   not conventionally provided e.g. for old spectra with no time stamp}.

  The Observable Axis 'should' be given. \footnote{its omission may seem   reasonable if publishing e.g. the coverage intended for a future   survey}.
  In this case, the Axis can be defined , but the Coverage could be empty, or rather undefined or unknown ???

  Other Axes e.g. Velocity 'may' be given, with their Coverage.

COVERAGE   The value 'must' be given for either the Location or the Bounds on   each Axis.
  Values 'should' be given for both Location and Bounds.

  If Location is not given then for some Axes the default Location can   be the mid-point of Bounds\footnote{in some cases this might be   complicated (e.g. some spatial coordinates) or impossible}.

  If Bounds are not given then in some cases defaults are possible   e.g. if a spatial axis has Coordsys ICRF the default would be all   sky \footnote{ a more restricted coverage might be derived once there   is a link to Observation and the telescope location.}

  Support 'should' be given, otherwise it defaults to Bounds, if present.

thanks, Mireille Received on 2006-09-11Z22:44:00