Versions Compared

Key

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

...

Also, I don't see what good the keyword does us. So I recommend removing it.

(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.

It is a part of standard time-related keywords listed under section titled "B. Time Keywords" in "The Recommended Columns and Keywords for a FITS Event List" and that's why it was added, I think, although I am not sure whether it is absolutely necessary or not. Indeed, gtbary seems not to read nor write this keyword. Also, in the meeting with the HEASARC FITS Working Group at NASA/GSFC on May 28th, 2003, it was suggested (if I remember correctly) that not all of the listed time-related keywords are necessary (See also topic 004 of the latest topics of FT1 and FT2 for more details). On the other hand, (I believe) it is a commonly-used keyword among other high-energy astrophisics missions and having this keyword in our FT1 file doesn't hurt us very much. So, I would recommend to keep it "just in case."

In any case (to drop it or to keep it), the HEASARC FITS Working Group might have a different opinion on this topic, especially from a point of view of multi-mission support.

4. OBS_ID and OBJECT keywords

...

(McEnery) I think that the OBS_ID might not be very useful. It is ambiguous when an observation starts. The LAT does not go into a different mode or start a new run when we repoint, so it would not be obvious when to start tagging events with a new OBS_ID. Also, as Tom points out, we will likely spend most of our time in survey mode even after year 1. I think that it may be useful to have RA_SCX, DEC_SCX, RA_SCZ, DEC_SCZ because they define the orientation of the LAT for each event.

(Hirayama) I don't remember why those keywords were introduced, but there are some records in topic 009 and topic 010 of the latest topics of FT1 and FT2, which might be of your interest.

5. MC_TRUTH keyword

(Digel) I think that the original intent was that this keyword indicate whether the data are entirely Monte Carlo truth values (i.e., actual directions, energies, etc.). We do not actually have files like this, and I propose removing this keyword. gtobsssim does add a column MC_SRC_ID to the files it generates, but this is easy enough to check for without the MC_TRUTH keyword.

...