Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

(Hirayama) The repetetion of "major" keywords (such as TELESCOP) was suggested by the HEASARC FITS Working Group when we met them at NASA/GSFC on May 28th, 2003. See also section titled "Answers to the questions" under topic 006 of the latest topics of FT1 and FT2 for more details. Because the FT1 definition changed quite a bit since then, it could be useful if some of us can meet the HEASARC FITS Working Group members to discuss on this topic.

...

For these reasons, I'd recommend removing HDUCLASS keywords entirely.

(Hirayama) The HDUCLASS and HDUCLASn keywords were added based on the HEASARC FITS Working Group's suggestion made when we met them at NASA/GSFC on May 28th, 2003. See also topic 002 of the latest topics of FT1 and FT2 for more details. I guess they will not appreciate it very much if we drop those keywords, although I can't (and shouldn't) speak for them, of course. In any case, I suggest to ask for their opinion before making a dicision to drop those keywords.

...

(Hirayama) For usage (and the meaning) of TASSIGN keyword, see the HEASARC's description. Based on the description, 'SATELLITE' is appropreate for our case, in my opinion.

...

(Stephens) Actually I thought this was a flag like the old PSR_COLS keyword and indicated that there were additional MC columns in the file. As we don't use this I think it can go away.

(Hirayama) Adding a new column to an FT1 file for a special case may not be appreciated by the HEASARC people. I remember they don't like "variants" of an FT1 file, mainly for archival purposes. I think their discussion was like: "for the GLAST team members (who know the file contents very well), it is just one additional column, but for the HEASARC members (who do NOT want to deal with the file contents as much as possible), it is a different file format." Probably it is better to talk to them about it again, once we have our conclusion about this topic, rather than trusting my rusty memory.

6. EVENT_ID column

(Digel) This is specified as a 32-bit integer. Right now, most likely the event IDs will be assigned by the LAT as a time stamp. Most likely we will need more than 32 bits to represent them, and of course they should look more or less like some kind of integer representation of the value in TIME. Right now, I don't know what to recommend for EVENT_ID.

(Foschini) Yes, it appears that EVENT_ID is a duplication of TIME column. It can be removed.

(Hirayama) The topic is also outlined in topic 010 as well as other range problems that might interest you. Also, note that it may not be very easy to identify an event by TIME column after gtbary overwrites its contents for a barycentric correction.

7. RECON_VERSION column

(Digel) RECON_VERSION is defined as a 2-byte integer to define the version of reconstruction (and classification) algorithm applied for a given event. This is probably more general than we need. In principle, a given events file could have events processsed with different versions of the software, but in practice, I do not expect that this will happen. I recommend that we make RECON_VERSION a header variable instead of a column.

...