[iaufwg] Call for vote on editorial issue

[Clive Page]

Mark

I don't understand why such a tiny issue is generating so much heat and so 
little light.

Bill isn't the only one who thought that the reference to random groups was 
undesirable: I do too.  Having an informal vote on the issue seems a good way to 
resolve it.

Perhaps I can point out that I'm an ex-radio-astronomer who has spent at least 
20 years writing software to handle FITS files, but I have never encountered a 
FITS file with the random groups structure, and I suspect I'm not alone in that. 
  Random groups is clearly deprecated in the standard.  For those who need to 
know, there's a whole chapter devoted to it, but it seems to me undesirable to 
refer to it in the rest of the document unless it's absolutely necessary.

We want to make our documents as clear as possible, and my feeling is that this 
document will be clearer without using as an example a deprecated structure of 
which most people have no knowledge.   But if the majority think otherwise, them 
I'm happy to abide by the vote: after all it is a pretty trivial issue.

Regards

-- 
Clive Page
Dept of Physics & Astronomy,
University of Leicester,
Leicester, LE1 7RH,  U.K.