DIF-C-HRIV-2-EPOXI-GARRADD-V1.0     [Raw Data]
DIF-C-HRIV-3/4-EPOXI-GARRADD-V1.0   [Calibrated and Resampled Data]

Catalog
=======
o In the dataset.cat file description, please add full citations to the
  Calibration papers (i.e., as footnotes in the text – in addition to the 
  REFERENCE objects that also exist).

o There needs to be a reference to the source of the pole definition for 
  Garradd and ISON in some appropriate place.  [Note that the SPICE kernels 
  likely involved have not been reviewed.]
  
o There is a known issue with a solar flare that significantly affects data 
  on a particular date.  This should be noted in the data set descriptions 
  for all affected data sets.
  
o In dataset.cat. the CITATION_DESC year must be '2014' since 
  this is when the data were reviewed and released to the public.

Documents
=========
o Ensure these data sets have the latest versions of these document files:
    day_of_year_calendar.lbl
    epoxi_cal_pipeline_summ.lbl
    epoxi_sis.lbl
    instruments_hampton.lbl
    pdsdd_epoxi.lbl
    quaternion_desc.lbl

o In epoxi_sis.pdf:
  - This document says labels for HRIV, MRI, and ITS level 3/4 data, PDS keyword
    PROCESSING_HISTORY_TEXT contain
      FLAT_PRO=
      FLATCONS=
      FLATTEMP=
      CALWINDW=
      CALWINPY=
    but the sample labels in the SIS's 4.4.4.1 and 4.4.4.2 do not.
  - p. 27: "DIF-L-HRII-3_4-EPOXI-LUNAR-CALS-V1.0" should have a / not a _
    i.e.   "DIF-L-HRII-3/4-EPOXI-LUNAR-CALS-V1.0"
  - epoxy_sis.pdf pages 47-9 the figures are misaligned with the text.  This 
    needs to be corrected in every copy of the document in all data sets.
    
o There are summary files with names like “hriv_3_4_epoxi_garrad.pdf”.  In at 
  least some of these labels in some data sets, the Julian Date field is 
  described as being in the form “YYYYMMDD”.  This needs to be fixed if it
  applies to this data set.
  
o The BODY_POSITIVE_POLE_CLOCK_ANGLE or whatever it’s called, is stated to 
  an unrealistic degree of precisicion for comets Garradd and ISON.  It 
  should certainly not be stated in these data to more accuracy than integer 
  degrees.  But in the document directory the table that lists geometry gives 
  the same clock angle for this value as for the celestial north clock angle.  
  If the value is not applicable, or otherwise unknown/unknowable, then the 
  appropriate constant needs to be defined and used.

o In places that describe the file naming convention, there needs to be a 
  clear indication of which time (beginning, middle, end) is used for 
  creating the file name.

o There is a mention of “transfer smear”, but no indication of how to deal 
  with it in the raw data.  This information is in the Klaasen papers, but 
  if possible there should be a cross-reference to this information where 
  “transfer smear” is mention in this summary document. Alternately, 
  reference those papers for “more details” at the top of the document.

    
CALIB/
======
o abscalvs/hrivis_100801_1_0_1.lbl is missing RECORD_TYPE = FIXED_LENGTH

o lindn/hriir_100928_1_1.lbl: AXIS_NAME = ("LINE_SAMPLES", "LINES", 
  "PER_PIXEL_LINEARITY_COEFFS") is legal, but "SAMPLE" and "LINE" (singular) 
  are much more common. 
  
o In calib/drkmodel/hrivis_020601_2_3.lbl:
  - The “Eg” equation in the code sample has a different exponent than in the 
    equation above. 10^-4 is correct.
  - The descriptive paragraph says the code fragment calculates DN/s, but in 
    fact the unit of the actual result is DN.
  - The pixel size is stated as being in mm, but the code would require 
    microns to produce reasonable results.
    
o In calib/xtalk/hrivis_071004_3_3.lbl
  - Last line in the NOTE field is missing an adjective (“Note: a ROTATE is 
    always performed [?] a SHIFT.”)
  - Consider removing the derivation in the NOTE field to a separate document
    and just referencing it, and noting in the label that the cross-talk is 
    not generally relevant/significant (if that is, indeed, the case).
    
o In the PSF file, the image looks like it is off by one line (possibly to 
  center it?).  This should be explained if it’s real, and corrected if not.

 
DATA/
=====
o The BODY_POSITIVE_POLE_CLOCK_ANGLE or whatever it’s called, is stated to 
  an unrealistic degree of precisicion for comets Garradd and ISON.  It 
  should certainly not be stated in these data to more accuracy than integer 
  degrees.  But in the document directory the table that lists geometry gives 
  the same clock angle for this value as for the celestial north clock angle.  
  If the value is not applicable, or otherwise unknown/unknowable, then the 
  appropriate constant needs to be defined and used.

o In the reduced data products SNR_IMAGE extensions, the SNR values appear 
  to be quantized.  Is this reasonable?