[iaufwg] FITS Registry Proposal

[William Pence]

Hopefully more people will contribute to this discussion, too, but for now 
I'll try to summarize and reply to the points made by Doug Tody, Bob Hanisch 
and Steve Allen:

1.  Bob and Doug both suggested opening up the registry so that proposed 
conventions, or working drafts of conventions could be registered.  I think 
this is fine as long as there is a clear distinction between the 2 (e.g., by 
having separate web pages for the "proposed" and the "approved" 
conventions).  So when someone submits a convention for approval it would 
first be put on the "proposed" web page during the public comment period. 
Then if the IAU-FWG approves it, it would be moved to the "approved" web 
page.  Otherwise it would remain on the "Proposed" web page indefinitely, 
(unless the proposers want to withdraw it).

2.  Doug felt that the proposed approval process is too strict and the 
requirements should be cut back to a minimum.  I agree that the requirements 
should be keep to a minimum and am open to specific suggestions for how to 
change the wording (at http://fits.gsfc.nasa.gov/fits_registry.html)  I 
still think however that a convention must meet some minimum requirements 
before it can be given the IAU-FWG Seal of Approval.  Doug specifically 
mentioned the requirement of not duplicating other conventions, but the 
current wording  does not forbid this, and only says that conventions should 
not duplicate other conventions "without good justification".

3.  Bob pointed out the strong similarities with the process used in the 
IVOA to promote standards, which is encouraging.   He also suggested reusing 
the existing VO registry infrastructure for the FITS conventions.  While I 
don't want to hold back progress and new ideas, in this case I don't really 
seen any advantage to trying to use the VO registry for this purpose.  I 
think the FITS community would be more comfortable with the traditional 
practice where the discussion of the proposed conventions would take place 
on FITSBITS/sci.astro.fits news group, and the proposed/approved conventions 
are just listed on a simple web site.  At least I would prefer to get things 
started this way, and postpone merging into the VO registries to some future 
time.

4. Finally, Steve raised a number of practical issues about where this web 
site would be located and who could add new information to it.  For now, I 
volunteer to maintain this under the FITS Support Office Web site at the 
HEASARC, which I already maintain.   Whether this is the most appropriate 
place for it in the long term is a good question, but I think we can worry 
about that later.  Setting up a mirror of the FITS Support Office web site, 
perhaps in Europe, would also be a good idea that we should consider.

regards,
Bill
-- 
____________________________________________________________________
Dr. William Pence                       pence at milkyway.gsfc.nasa.gov
NASA/GSFC Code 662       HEASARC        +1-301-286-4599 (voice)
Greenbelt MD 20771                      +1-301-286-1684 (fax)