> On Wed, 17 Sep 2003, Alberto Micol wrote:
> > In one sentence I would simply answer that the instrument names
> > do not add anything to the identifiers, hence they should not be used.
> > Instrument names are part of the metadata associated with
> > the data nothing to do with the identifier.
>
> Ray Plante wrote:
>
> The WD
> recommends a DNS-like name as a way of avoiding collisions. The ADEC
> proposal suggested names based on instrument for the same reason (I
> believe).
>
Dear Ray P., dear All,
Can anyone expand on the ADEC proposal of having instruments as part of the ID ? I don't understand what that buy us.
> In the case of ESO, the instrument name is part of the identifier, repeating it
> would not help clarifying things
>
Also, keep in mind the case of a data center that combines 2 data set from differente missions/instruments to build a new set of products. In this case there is not a single instrument to be used as a possible datacollectionID ...
Thanks,
Alberto M.
-- Alberto.Micol-at-eso.org Tel: +49 89 32006365 HST Science Archive ST-ECF Fax: +49 89 32006480 ESA/RSSD/SN c/o ESO Karl Schwarzschild Str.2, http://archive.eso.org/ No ads, thanks. Garching bei Muenchen, http://www.stecf.org/ HTML emails D-85748 GermanyReceived on 2003-09-18Z09:14:06