A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » FITS
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

[fitsbits] New DUMP FITS extension

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old August 17th 07, 10:26 AM posted to sci.astro.fits
Preben Grosbol
external usenet poster
Posts: 11
Default [fitsbits] New DUMP FITS extension

On Thursday 16 August 2007 21:51, William Pence wrote:
The question is what do we (the FITS community in general, and the
IAUFWG in particular) do now? *Should we draft a definition document
describing the DUMP extension (as is currently being done for the
FOREIGN extension type)? *Do we want to go further and endorse the DUMP
extension for use in other data sets distributed by other projects? *Or,
would we rather discourage the use of the DUMP (or any other new
extension type) if the data can easily be contained in an existing
extension type? Personally, I would rather not see a proliferation of
new extension types that are structurally identical to the existing
IMAGE extension.

It's long time ago but to my recollection we felt, at the time, that it
was good to reserve a few extension names such as FILEMARK
and DUMP so that they could not be used for something very
different from what their names indicate.

One may argue that DUMP and FOREIGN are very close. Thus,
it would have been more natural that what FOREIGN now is used for
should have been made the definition of DUMP- but that's history.
The intention for DUMP, I think, was to store a bit-stream with very
complex structure potentially with bit fields etc. This is somewhat
different from storage of a well define foreign file format (e.g. jpeg,
png or pdf).

I agree that we should try to keep the number of extensions to
an absolute minimum. The correct proceedure would have been
that the Solar Optical Telescope had contacted IAUFITS before
using the extension name DUMP. Following the strict standard,
we could declare the usage of DUMP illegal as the name was
reserved and IAU FITS was not included in the discussions
of its definition. Such an approach would be too hard. Since
it is already in use, the only thing we can do is to work with
them to get a definition which satisfy minimum requirements
such as inclusion of date, reference to organization, application
and version of the writing software plus definition documents.



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
[fitsbits] New DUMP FITS extension Mark Calabretta FITS 0 August 17th 07 01:54 AM
[fitsbits] New DUMP FITS extension Doug Tody FITS 0 August 16th 07 11:55 PM
[fitsbits] New DUMP FITS extension Maren Purves FITS 0 August 16th 07 10:54 PM
[fitsbits] New DUMP FITS extension Doug Tody FITS 0 August 16th 07 09:26 PM
[fitsbits] New DUMP FITS extension William Pence FITS 0 August 16th 07 08:51 PM

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:32 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2020 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.