|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
[fitsbits] Abuse of EXTEND keyword
I understand this point however you can not prevent users
from adding their own (conforming) keywords If the consensus is that there should not be any connection between the primary header and extensions. perhaps this should be stated in the revised standard. For example, state that it should be possible to add extensions without requiring any changes to the primary header. This would of course deprecate the EXTEND keyword. Randy Preben Grosbol wrote: On Thursday 23 August 2007 23:15, Randall Thompson wrote: Although not a reserved keyword, NEXTEND is commonly used to describe the number of included extensions There is a danger in explicit references to either the number of extensions and individual ones. It is trivial to remove or add extensions to FITS files. With explicit references in the primary header, one would need to parse and correct it to maintain valid header information. Preben _______________________________________________ fitsbits mailing list http://listmgr.cv.nrao.edu/mailman/listinfo/fitsbits |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
[fitsbits] Abuse of EXTEND keyword | Preben Grosbol | FITS | 0 | August 24th 07 08:46 AM |
[fitsbits] Abuse of EXTEND keyword | Preben Grosbol | FITS | 1 | August 23rd 07 01:59 PM |
[fitsbits] Clarification of EXTEND, please | Stephen Walton | FITS | 8 | May 19th 04 12:53 AM |
[fitsbits] Clarification of EXTEND, please | Thierry Forveille | FITS | 0 | May 14th 04 06:31 PM |
[fitsbits] BLANK keyword misinterpretation | Steve Allen | FITS | 4 | November 21st 03 04:42 PM |