DIF-C-HRIV-3/4-9P-ENCOUNTER-V3.0

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 In dataset.cat. the CITATION_DESC year must be '2014' since 
  this is when the data were reviewed and released to the public.
  
o In dataset.cat, the description of the east flip for lookback images 
  is incorrect. (In the paragraph beginning, "Using this convention for 
  Tempel 1 approach images...".)  See Jianyang's slide 17 for the 
  geometry and correct orientation.
  
o In dataset.cat, REFERENCE_KEY_ID = "HAMPTONETAL2005" shows up twice

o The required instrument host catalog file is missing.

o In hriv.cat:
  REFERENCE_KEY_ID = "BARRYETAL2010" is not found in ref.cat.  If this is
  the same reference as already exists in the PDS catalog, add that 
  REFERENCE object.  Otherwise, change the REFERENCE_KEY_ID to a unique
  value and supply the corresponding reference object.
  
o In dif.cat:
  REFERENCE_KEY_ID = "RIEBER&SHARROW2009" is not found in ref.cat. If this
  is the same reference as already exists in the PDS catalog, add that 
  REFERENCE object.  Otherwise, change the REFERENCE_KEY_ID to a unique
  value and supply the corresponding reference object.

o In voldesc.cat:
  - VOLUME_NAME is invalid - it refers to a different volume.
  - This data set is NOT an amalgam of physical volumes, so the VOLUME_ID 
    must be valid - it may not end in 'X'.  
  - VOLUME_VERSION_ID must be set with respect to the final, valid VOLUME_ID.



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 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.
  
o Need a high-level pointer to the observation log in 
  hriv_encounter_data_summary.pdf, to help new users find data of good 
  quality.


CALIB/
======
o 3 of the 9 PSFs look like they are shifted by one line (possibly to 
  center them?).  This should be explained if it’s real, and corrected if not.
  
o In abscalvs labels, the table description needs to take into account 
  dividing by exposure time, and do so in a manner that avoids confusing 
  users reading the table and column descriptions. 
  
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.


DATA/
=====
o Some images seem to show the same SNR/Image issues around impact time as 
  the ITS 64x64 data do.  Yan provided this specific problematic image for 
  investigation:
  
    dif-c-hriv-3_4-9p-encounter-v3.0/data/rad/2005/185/hv05070405_9000984_001_r.fit