S. Digel, 11 May 2005
Not much news to report this week.
Regarding LS-003 (Low-level calibration, i.e., the files needed for running reconstruction and classification but not needed by anything that works on Level 1 data), I think we have agreement that this does not need to be a FITS-ified data product. David's last communication on the subject was that it still should be described in the SDP ICD, at least at a level of detail sufficient for the GSSC to know what to expect in terms of file types, names, volumes, and likely update frequency. I haven't heard any objection from the LAT side, but I don't think draft text exists yet either.
LS-006 (LAT configuration history) is still the least well defined. I tried to argue that it is not in fact a science data product, because it is not the product of science processing or used by any of the science tools. David conceives of it as a fairly detailed record of the state of the LAT (like how many strips are dead or hot on each layer of each tower at any given time). I'm advocating that it should be a human-readable record of when the response functions needed to be changed, or events needed to be reprocessed, and why. I tried to call it an operations data product, but Steve Culp points out that it isn't really. I'd still argue that it is an ISOC product, but he's right that it is downstream from operations.
Is there an LS-001? Not this week.
All of the other data products that will have FITS definitions need to have these definitions scrutinized.
Are any science data products obviously missing? No one has pointed out any.