|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
[fitsbits] Proposed Changes to the FITS Standard
On Thursday 16 August 2007 16:32, Peter Teuben wrote:
So, random groups may be old, but it works and isn't broken. Yes of course. Rereading the FITS v3 proposal its wording should be okay with respect to random groups as it is actually a primary header. My main concern is the wording of Sec. 3.7 which may open the door for changes too wide. Preben |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
[fitsbits] Proposed Changes to the FITS Standard | Mark Calabretta | FITS | 0 | August 2nd 07 09:39 AM |
[fitsbits] Proposed Changes to the FITS Standard | Steve Allen | FITS | 0 | August 1st 07 06:08 PM |
[fitsbits] Proposed Changes to the FITS Standard | Thierry Forveille | FITS | 0 | August 1st 07 04:51 PM |
[fitsbits] Proposed Changes to the FITS Standard | Mark Calabretta | FITS | 0 | August 1st 07 09:01 AM |
[fitsbits] Proposed Changes to the FITS Standard | William Pence | FITS | 2 | July 24th 07 04:57 AM |