...
- Define classes for tracking infrastructure
- Flesh out Rob's diagram: http://docdb.fnal.gov/ILC-public/DocDB/ShowDocument?docid=402
- Make sure the relevant ideas from existing code are included.
- Flesh out Rob's diagram: http://docdb.fnal.gov/ILC-public/DocDB/ShowDocument?docid=402
- Define a cheater for SimTrackHit to whatever it is that is used as input for pattern recognition.
- Rob will do this once the endpoint is defined.
- Re: links back and forth between Geometry and TrackerHits
- Do we need full bidirectionality, as Jeremy has suggested, or is one way enough.
- Re: Forward geometry.
- Can Hans present a road map?
- How does the above affect tracking algorithms?
- This was written in response to Rob's comments that we need to resolve:
- Cylindrical vs polyhedral issue.
- Version control.
- This was written in response to Rob's comments that we need to resolve:
...
- We have narrowed down the options considerably. The main remaining choice is whether to go with Dima's option for clusters or with something else.
- This will be done as soon as 1) is implemented.
- This was not decided. Most of us agree that there should be a clear distinction between event scope information and run scope or job scope information. So access to hits should be via the event no the geometry system. Jeremy feels that the correct method to access the events is via a hasReadOut() method implemented on elements of the geometry system.
- I strongly prefer the first option since I believe it is important to segregte event scope information from job scope information.
- Hans prepared material but we did not get to it. The material is attached.
- We made progress on the cylindrical vs polyhedral issue by reducing the scope of disagreement: see Monday. We did not make progress on version control.