On Tue, 1 Apr 2008, William Pence wrote:

No it is not contrary to the standard. Projects are free to invent their own
local conventions for storing the data in whatever structure is most
convenient for them.

definitely agreed !

If, however, the intention is to pack 3 1024 x 12288
element 2-D arrays into a binary table, then a more explicit way to do this
would be as follows:

NAXIS1 = 150994944 / width of table (1024*12288*3*4)
NAXIS2 = 1 / table has only 1 row
...
TFIELDS = 3

however a far less contrived way would be not to use a binary table, but
either a sequence of 3 image extensions with NAXIS=2 NAXIS1=1024
NAXIS2=12288, or a traditional FITS image with a datacube (NAXIS=3, and
NAXIS1,NAXIS2,NAXIS3=1013,12288,3 or whatever permutation thereof.

After all a 2-d array *is* an image, and is very easily displayed using
an image display program

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
is a newsreading account used by more persons to
avoid unwanted spam. Any mail returning to this address will be rejected.
Users can disclose their e-mail address in the article if they wish so.