[iaufwg] convention or standard

[William Pence]

Mark Calabretta wrote:
> On Thu 2006/10/12 14:38:51 -0400, William Pence wrote
> in a message to: iaufwg at donar.cv.nrao.edu
> 
>> It might be argued that this is a misuse of the IMAGE extension since the 
>> data are not an image in the usual sense of the word, but my own feeling is 
> 
> I would argue that way, but wouldn't it be more natural to put the byte
> stream in a 1-row, 1-column BINTABLE as a byte-array (or even bit-array).

The BINTABLE has more structural complexity than is necessary for storing a 
single byte stream, but it does open up possibilities for packing multiple 
blobs of data into the table (as multiple rows or columns).  This is what we 
do in the tiled image compression convention.

Bill