[iaufwg] approval of the 'FOREIGN' extension convention

[Robert Hanisch]

I think the document is basically ok, and the text in section 4 provides
some potentially useful background information.

Lucio noted that the alignment ruler in Section 2 might be unnecessary.  In
any case, if it is there it and the following card images had better be
typeset in a non-proportional font or it is truly useless.

I also note that the font sizes (e.g., of the FG_ keywords) jump up and down
a lot.

Bob


On 12/12/06 11:25 AM, "Doug Tody" <dtody at nrao.edu> wrote:

> Lucio -
> 
> I agree that the purpose of registering FITS conventions is primarily
> to document existing practice, however it seems fine if the authors of
> the convention want to make minor changes or updates when this is done,
> particularly if the convention is still in use.  The authors can judge
> the impact if any on existing implementations.  If there is any concern
> it might be useful be useful to note such revisions in an appendix.
> 
> In this case the document is a revision of the original design
> specification, which probably explains the "over documentation" you
> refer to.  Since a convention like this is in part a view into the
> past, it may be better to avoid extensive changes to the document,
> as even the authors might well disagree now with the decisions which
> were made in the past, which reflect a different time.
> 
> - Doug
> 
> 
> On Tue, 12 Dec 2006, Lucio Chiappetti wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, 6 Dec 2006, William Pence wrote:
>> 
>>> A revised document that describes this convention (in MS Word and PDF
>>> formats) has been placed on the FITS registry web site at
>>> http://fits.gsfc.nasa.gov/fits_registry.html.
>> 
>>> Please review this document for yourself, and let me know if you have
>>> any further comments or objections about this convention;
>> 
>> Surely we cannot have any objection about the convention, as the purpose
>> of the registry is to track a convention which is : (a) in use ; (b)
>> adequately documented.  I have however the following comments on the
>> document :
>> 
>> - there are parts, like the entire section 4, or the explanatory
>>   text to FG_COMP. which are probably "over-documentation". I mean,
>>   they look like design notes, not usage notes.
>> 
>>   Also I'm slightly confused by the usage of past, present and future
>>   tenses. I assumed that the FOREIGN convention was defined and
>>   implemented long ago for "its own purposes" and then "frozen" (was it a
>>   wrong impression ?), so it looks strange to "reserve" a keyword for
>>   future use, or to write section 4 as requirements for something to be
>>   written.
>> 
>> - I have not retained a copy of the original document, and I can't
>>   remember if keyword FG_MTYPE was in there. If it was not, it would
>>   be strange to add it now. If it was, it seems strange to make
>>   reference to a MIME type, when probably this concept did not exist
>>   when the convention was first defined. Sort of "a posteriori history
>>   editing" ...
>> 
>>   But I might have understood the time frame wrongly.
>> 
>> - very minor : probably the 1-80 alignment "ruler" in section 2 is
>>   unnecessary or redundant
>> 
>> None of the above comments precludes the acceptance of the convention.
>> 
>> -- 
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Lucio Chiappetti - INAF/IASF - via Bassini 15 - I-20133 Milano (Italy)
>> For more info : http://www.iasf-milano.inaf.it/~lucio/personal.html
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> iaufwg mailing list
>> iaufwg at listmgr.cv.nrao.edu
>> http://listmgr.cv.nrao.edu/mailman/listinfo/iaufwg
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> iaufwg mailing list
> iaufwg at listmgr.cv.nrao.edu
> http://listmgr.cv.nrao.edu/mailman/listinfo/iaufwg