From neese@psi.edu Mon Jun 5 18:27:15 2000 Received: from boojum.psi.edu (boojum.psi.edu [192.102.219.11]) by earth.astro.umd.edu (8.9.1a/8.9.1/WLS8.9) with ESMTP id SAA19298; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 18:27:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from neese@localhost) by boojum.psi.edu (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) id PAA11014; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 15:26:58 -0700 (MST) Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 15:26:58 -0700 (MST) From: Carol Neese Message-Id: <200006052226.PAA11014@boojum.psi.edu> To: Tyler.L.Brown@jpl.nasa.gov, dbritt@utk.edu, drd@psi.edu, grayzeck@astro.umd.edu, holladb1@spacemsg.jhuapl.edu, ma@astro.umd.edu, mcfadden@astro.umd.edu, msharlow@igpp.ucla.edu, msykes@as.arizona.edu, neese@psi.edu, raugh@astro.umd.edu, sjoy@galsun.igpp.ucla.edu, tholen@ifa.hawaii.edu Subject: near data set liens Content-Length: 7783 X-Lines: 195 Status: RO Liens from the June 2, 2000 review of the NEAR Eros data sets. June 5, 2000. These liens are the responsibility of NEAR SDC. In many cases PDS personnel have agreed to help, and this is noted where applicable. All data sets: 1. The "known problems" posted on the review web site are admitted as liens. These are included as an appendix to this document. 2. Remove empty directories. 3. Catalog objects have various formatting and editing problems. Tyler will polish them up and give them back to Doug with an indication of any further work that needs to be done on them. Note: Mark Sharlow caught a lot of typos in his emailed comments on the mag catalog objects. Some of these apply to the other instruments as well. 4. In the AAREADME file of each data set, include a list of all the data products intended to be archived for that instrument over the course of the mission, with an estimate of when it will be included. Included will be the data products listed in the archive plan, plus any software that will be delivered. Don will write this description. 5. Some TARGET_NAMES still need to be filled in. It is understood that target names are by phase and may not refer to individual targets. 6. The word "directory" has been misspelled in all the AAREADME.TXT files. 7. In the main description of the data labels, give instructions where to find the parameter definitions. 8. "Self-reference" the instrument, calibration, and mission documents that are not already referenced, so that they can be cited. 9. The ascii version of the Tech Digest paper is lacking any reference to the source of the paper. This should be added. (The reference exists in the pdf version.) 10. References need to be supplied in a "reference.cat" file for all reference objects. Tyler will collect the existing references into such a file. (Currently most of the references are included at the end of each catalog file where the reference object appeared. If there are any missing references they will need to be supplied.) MSI data sets: 1. Get thumbnails of the MSI images and place in a "browse" directory on the data volumes to aid users in identifying the images of interest. These thumbnail images will need labels. 2. Include the planning spreadsheets used by the MSI team to document image planning. These documents need labels too. Anne recommends including it as a delimited file for use in spreadsheets. 3. Add two additional references to the end of the MSI data set catalog, the Murchie and Hawkins papers describing the calibration and the instrument. 4. Illumination angles have not yet been provided. Leave the parameters in the label but give them values of "UNK". NIS data sets: 1. Jeff Warren's NIS instrument paper from the Space Science Review needs to be included in the NIS documents. If the paper itself cannot be included, at least the reference must be included. In any case, include the reference in the data set and instrument cat files. 2. Table two in the NIS calibration paper contains the science rationale for the phases that the reviewers would like to see in the catalog objects. Add a line to the data set catalog referring users to this information. Magnetometer: (Strong suggestion, not a formal lien, to add short one-line descriptions excerpted from the parameter definitions to the column descriptions in the data labels. This would make the data MUCH more accessible to users.) 1. Timetag is not adequately defined. Improve the definition in the parameter definitions file. 2. AAREADME.TXT file is too terse and doesn't provide enough information to users. Improve it to follow more closely the guidelines in the PDS Standards Reference, Appendix D. 3. Some column names in the index table have disallowed characters such as square brackets. They need to be enclosed in quotes, or the brackets removed. Lines 113, 124, and 135 in the mag index label. 4. The label MAGCAL01.LBL references nonexistent files: MAGCAL01.TXT.ASC and MAGCAL01FI11.TIF. These appear to be misspellings of MAGCAL01.TXT and MAGCAL01FIG11.TIF. 5. In MAG.TXT, there are at least two typographical problems: (a) the name "Acuna" is missing a letter ("Acu a") in several places; (b) in the endnotes, there is no space between the reference numbers and the authors' names. 6. Typo in MAGCAL01.LBL: "thefile names". 7. In MAGDATASET.CAT, the DATA_SET_RELEASE_DATE value is blank. The START_TIME and STOP_TIME values should be in the format YYYY-MM-DDThh:mm:ss[.fff]. MAGDATASET.CAT also references a file msi_definitions under DOCUMENT; this filename must be updated. 8. There are bracketed references cited in MAGINST.CAT which are not contained in REFERENCE objects in the file. These should be added. 9. In INDEX.LBL and CUMINDEX.LBL, a nonexistent file mag_definitions.txt is mentioned; this filename needs to be updated. Also, "mneumonic" should be "mnemonic." X-ray / Gamma ray data set: 1. Supply missing parameter definitions. Ed and Anne have compiled a list of the missing ones. NLR data set: (No liens specific to this data set.) Geometry data set: 1. Add contact information for the NAIF node to the data set catalog. 2. There are some label keyword errors that need to be corrected. The labels are generated by NAIF software, so check if there has been an update to this software that would correct the problem, and if not, get NAIF to fix their software. Tyler will talk to NAIF about it. ----------------------------------------------- Non-lien items discussed at the review: It would be good to get an overview of the scientific objectives of each phase, by instrument, to put into the data set catalogs. Lucy will work with Doug to get the needed information for MSI, and similar information should be added for the other instruments as well. It is essential to archive the calibration software, MSICAL for MSI and NISCAL for NIS. Software can be put on a separate CD at the end of the mission. We need to get permission from Academic Press to include the papers in the archive. If we can't get permission to include the papers, we will have to include just a reference. Mike will have to talk with them. We also need to get permission from the Space Science Review to include the papers published there. Carol will email to Chris Russell to get this permission. Based on comments by Mark Sharlow it was decided to produce a repackaging of all the mag data at the end of the mission. This would be a more user-friendly version with ascii tables (or non-FITS binary tables). This will be done either by SBN or PPI node, not by NEAR. It would be good to get the NAIF people to review the Geometry data set, but they have not done it yet. NEAR data sets discussed for future archiving: XGRS database of elemental composition of meteorites. NLR topographic maps. Calibration software - MSICAL, NISCAL, NISPLOT. Shape model of Eros. Images labeled with the names of all named features, and/or lists of features with latitude and longitude. NIS logbooks (with the calibrated data) Revised timeline: PDS external review: June 2, 2000. End of mission: Feb. 14, 2001. Final archive delivery: May 15th, 2001. PDS review of final delivery: June 15, 2001. Liens cleared by: July 15, 2001. Timescale for resolution of liens from this review: Carol will compile the liens list and send to SDC by June 7th. We will have a telecon the following week (amongst SDC, SBN, and Tyler) to set the delivery schedule for the first liens-resolved pipeline delivery. When SBN recieves this delivery, we will do an internal review to confirm the resolution of the liens, then give the go-ahead for further pipeline production.