|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
[fitsbits] Start of the CONTINUE keyword Public Comment Period
This is to announce the start of the 30-day Public Comment Period on
the CONTINUE keyword convention that has been submitted for inclusion in the 'Registry of FITS Conventions' which is maintained by the IAU FITS Working Group. This is the 9th in a growing series of conventions submitted for inclusion in the Registry. Detailed information about this convention and a sample FITS file that uses it are available for public review and comment from the FITS registry web page at http://fits.gsfc.nasa.gov/fits_registry.html The CONTINUE keyword allows long character string keyword values to be continued on the next keyword(s) in the FITS header. This convention supports string keyword values that are longer than the 68-character maximum that can be represented in a single FITS keyword. A trivial example of this convention is shown below: SVALUE = 'This is a long string value that is &' / Any comments CONTINUE 'continued over three keywords& ' / may be appended CONTINUE ' in the FITS header.' / after the quoted value. Under this convention, the last character of each string that is to be continued must be the `&' character, and the continuation string is contained in a sequence of 1 or more CONTINUE keywords (which do not have a `=' character in column 9 and hence have no formal value). Comments may be posted here on the FITSBITS mail exploder or the sci.astro.fits newsgroup. Minor typographical issues may be sent directly to the authors of the convention. Bill Pence (on behalf of the IAU FITS Working Group) -- __________________________________________________ __________________ Dr. William Pence NASA/GSFC Code 662 HEASARC +1-301-286-4599 (voice) Greenbelt MD 20771 +1-301-286-1684 (fax) |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
[fitsbits] Start of the CONTINUE keyword Public Comment Period
Before I disappear, I give some brief comments :
I think the material supplied to document the convention is clear enough (and the convention is sound and simple, although I remind everybody that inclusion in the Registry should NOT imply a discussion on the merit of a convention, but only on completeness of documentation, usefulness and actual use at one or more institution). I do not think the issue of keyword ordering and repetition of a keyword with same name is an issue, considering the proposed modifications to the Standard, and the nature of "commentary" keyword of CONTINUE. I am also pleased by the fact that this convention can be clearly spotted by a reader because of the presence of the "magic" string LONGSTRN= 'OGIP 1.0' So my only request for change is very formal. The explanatory document http://fits.gsfc.nasa.gov/registry/c...e_keyword.html is correctly titled "CONTINUE *Long String* Keyword Convention" I suggest this title (including the words *Long String*) be used even in higher level pages in the Registry instead of the shorter "CONTINUE Keyword Convention". The convention is clearly documented to deal with long STRINGS "only" (not numeric valued keywords which somebody mentioned), and is not characterized *just by the presence* of the CONTINUE keywords. But the specific ways it uses the CONTINUE keywords are flagged by LONGSTRN= 'OGIP 1.0'. So the proper name would be "CONTINUE *Long String* Keyword Convention" or "OGIP 1.0 *Long String* Keyword Convention" (assuming one could develop e.g. a LONGSTRN= 'Erewhon University 7.3' which uses a different continuation mechanism) Lucio Chiappetti - INAF IASF Milano -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
[fitsbits] Start of the CONTINUE keyword Public Comment Period
On Jul 14, 2007, at 6:46 PM, Craig Markwardt wrote:
Bill, could the convention be clarified to indicate that CONTINUE should not be used for keyword values that could fit in a single FITS card? I'm not sure how one ensures this given that a continued keyword might later be edited. And/or, that CONTINUE should be avoided for standard FITS keywords? Which are the "standard" keywords - the ones mentioned in the standard? My example was a keyword from another convention. On Jul 13, 2007, at 2:28 AM, LC's NoSpam Newsreading account wrote: I remind everybody that inclusion in the Registry should NOT imply a discussion on the merit of a convention, but only on completeness of documentation, usefulness and actual use at one or more institution). Well, every previous convention has also generated a rousing discussion of the merits of the proposal. This seems rather healthy. I'm also not sure what the distinction is between "merit" and "usefulness". Presumably we are in a period of capturing and documenting as many local conventions as possible. The bigger question is what comes next. Some (I'll timidly suggest the checksum convention) seem mature enough to become part of the standard. Others, as with this current discussion, appear to have some real issues with broad adoption. Still others, like foreign encapsulation perhaps, might simply appear as some sort of appendix since a particular HDU either expresses such an object or does not. I guess I'm also wondering whether the point of the registry is to capture legacy conventions or to encourage new conventions. Personally, I would prefer that the staid, but reliable, FITS standard process remain the primary focus of FITS development efforts. We don't need novelty for its own sake. I do not think the issue of keyword ordering and repetition of a keyword with same name is an issue, considering the proposed modifications to the Standard, I'm getting lost with this discussion. What proposed modifications are we talking about? So the proper name would be "CONTINUE *Long String* Keyword Convention" or "OGIP 1.0 *Long String* Keyword Convention" I disagree. Continuation is only one possible way to implement a long string capability. To be truly useful, a general facility for representing long strings needs to be applicable to any string valued keyword. On the other hand, continuing a keyword appears to have some real complications - some esoteric, like the need to preserve 32- bit alignment within ASCII encoded checksum strings - others more fundamental, such as ambiguous keyword ordering restrictions. But, if we're not to discuss merit, that drops us to two criteria for registration: documentation and prior use. Like all the other conventions to date, this one appears to have been actually used in some large or small number of files. The documentation seems too minimal and unconstraining, however, as expressed in the previous messages in this thread. Rob |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
[fitsbits] Start of the 'INHERIT' Public Comment Period | William Pence | FITS | 8 | April 8th 07 03:59 AM |
[fitsbits] Start of the 'INHERIT' Public Comment Period | Doug Tody | FITS | 0 | April 6th 07 11:59 PM |
[fitsbits] Start of the 'INHERIT' Public Comment Period | Rob Seaman | FITS | 0 | April 6th 07 07:24 PM |
[fitsbits] Start of the 'INHERIT' Public Comment Period | Robert Hanisch | FITS | 0 | April 6th 07 01:00 AM |
[fitsbits] Start of the 'INHERIT' Public Comment Period | Rob Seaman | FITS | 0 | April 5th 07 11:57 PM |