Global Liens ============ issue: SPICE conflict between different kernel versions. --> Write an errata explaining the issue and what users need to be aware of. issue: There are no subdirectory structure, with all products placed at the root of the collection directories. --> TB: Strongly suggest adding some structure for the user that may browse the collection, so as to not overwhelm them with number of files, perhaps unrelated, mixed together. issue: Label Context Reference Mismatch --> The 'name' values associated with internal references to context objects do not match the Context_Area.*.name values as found in the context object file referenced. For targets, it is probably fine to be different if it conforms to SBN formatting. Many of these context files were provided by the Lucy mission, and so it is expected to match. Note, usages are not consistent across all bundles or even files within a bundle or collection (correct in some labels, not in others). Those unique to a particular bundle will be mentioned with that bundle. Lastly, please note that the PDS validate tool will identify all instances of these if you need a complete list of what and where. Examples common across all bundles: --> --> "Lucy Mission" vs "Lucy" (urn:nasa:pds:context:investigation:mission.lucy) --> --> "Lucy Spacecraft" vs "Lucy" (urn:nasa:pds:context:instrument_host:spacecraft.lucy) --> --> "Dinkinesh" or "DINKINESH" vs "(152830) Dinkinesh" (urn:nasa:pds:context:target:asteroid.152830_dinkinesh) issue: Repetitive name when resolving acronyms? --> REVIEW_DISCUSS: The term "Lucy's L'LORRI" or "Lucy L'LORRI" is used in various places (labels and text). But this translate to "Lucy's Lucy LOng ..." or "Lucy Lucy LOng ...". Is this okay? There are similar cases for "L'Ralph" and "L'TES". --> --> TB: I can personally go both ways with this, and see how it could be correct as is: "[spacecraft_name] [instrument_name]" => "[Lucy] [Lucy LOng ...]" --> --> There is one noted exception to this with the LEISA document collection title "Lucy Ralph LEISA Document Collection" --> --> Also note that when we populate DOI meta data, we may expand the acronym out, so it may look odd saying "Lucy Lucy". issue: Copies of published papers in PDS --> Identification_Area.Citation_Information.doi should not be for the published paper. PDS should never produce a DOI for a paper primarly published elsewhere. --> Add to the Identification_Area.Citation_Information.description the fact these papers of exact copy of open access documents. --> Add to the an to the published paper and add a description mentioning the relation between the PDS copy and the publish copy. Ex: "Original published source of this Open Access document." --> For any other label referencing these PDS copies in their Reference_List, we should include the external paper doi reference along side the internal reference to the internal copy. issue: Reference_List references missing or , or not being necessary. --> Whenever you reference a paper in a data product, please add a (for external_reference) or (for internal_reference) stating very briefly why this paper is being referenced. This can be as simple as saying it is the "SSR paper" or "description of the mission". An example is where the Calibration paper is being referenced; we should add a Calibration paper. For internal references to data products, usually the is clear enough, but this is not the case when referencing documents. If the referenced paper is not considered essential to either understanding or using the product, it should not be referenced. --> --> Example: lucy.leisa/data_dinkinesh_calibrated/lei_0752129330_02298_sci_04.xml (lines 1042-1049, two references) issue: Mission Phase --> Is the mission_phase_name keyword going to be in any of the labels? Suggest adding this to the Lucy LDD, with a standard list of values to validate against. You can use the New Horizons LDD (nh:mission_phase_name) as an example. issue: Adding sb:Calibration_Information --> For the calibrated products, I see that the Reference_List includes the data_to_raw/calibration_product. You can also add this information, plus additional information for the user to the "sb:Calibration_Information". I would highly highly encourage this. files: '*/bundle.xml' --> Suggest removing PDS4 jargon, "Bundle", from Identification_Area.title and replace with "Archive" or something similar. --> Suggest clarifying in the Identification_Area.Citation_Information.description that there are more than just "data products" in these bundles. There are also document products for instance; also Calibration products, though this is a usually a data product of one sort or another. --> Why does each bundle (except mission and rss) have a Reference_List that includes the mission:document, [instrument]:document (which is found within the bundle), and [instrument] SSR paper (found within the bundle)? Are these necessary for the generation of the bundle? If so, why are they not included in the collection.xml files? files: '*/*/collection.xml' --> For the Identification_Area and Citation_Information sub-area, we take these values as what we would want to use for reference and citation information for the PDS product (collection in this case), like titles, authors, editors, and abstract (pds:description). We use these to populate DOI meta data, for assigned DOIs. Please have these values reflect what you would want to see in the DOI meta data, and by consequence at the ADS. --> --> Note that first occurrences of acronyms will be spelled out with the acronym being in parentheses. Ex: "L'LORRI" => "Lucy LOng Range Reconnaissance Imager (L'LORRI)". I would recommend doing this in your bundle/collection labels, in the abstract (pds:description) and/or title. --> Suggest removing PDS4 jargon, "Collection", from Identification_Area.title --> Strongly (on verge of requiring for active missions) suggest adding Funding_Acknowledgement to Identification_Area.Citation_Information. --> entries are not consistent. Please confirm these are correct. In general there is an internal reference to a copy of Levison et al. (2021) paper and an internal reference to the instrument SIS. Exceptions noted below: --> --> urn:nasa:pds:lucy.llorri:calibration::1.0 (only lists SIS) --> --> urn:nasa:pds:lucy.ltes:document::1.0 lists the instrument SSR paper as well --> --> urn:nasa:pds:lucy.mvic:document::1.0 lists the instrument SSR paper as well --> --> urn:nasa:pds:lucy.mission:document::1.0 lists no references (probably correct) --> Please add to the Reference_List an internal link to the collection_overview product. files: '*/readme.txt' --> At the end of this file it suggests questions can go to "https://pds-smallbodies.astro.umd.edu/about/contact_info.shtml or pds-operator@jpl.nasa.gov". Using this url and/or email sounds like a bad idea. SBN website may move, or the pds-operator may change address. Remove contact info. lucy.mission ============ issue: Label Context Reference Mismatch --> The 'name' values associated with internal references to context objects do not match the Context_Area.*.name values as found in the context object file referenced. Note, usages are not uniform across all labels in this bundle (correct in some labels, not in others). Lastly, please note that the PDS validate tool will identify all instances of these if you need a complete list of what and where. All known problem instances for this bundle are below: --> --> "Lucy Mission" vs "Lucy" (urn:nasa:pds:context:investigation:mission.lucy) [4 instances] --> --> "Lucy Spacecraft" vs "Lucy" (urn:nasa:pds:context:instrument_host:spacecraft.lucy) [6 instances] file: 'document/collection.xml' --> REVIEW_DISCUSS: Consider having SBN create a DOI for this collection. But since this collection only contains copies of other papers external to PDS, perhaps not. file: 'document/olkin_et_al_2021.{xml,pdf}' --> The Identification_Area.Citation_Information.description should be an abstract, but currently it just says "This paper" which is not helpful to a user or what is expected. --> The filename and label implies that this is Olkin et al. (2021) paper, but when I open the PDF, it is an exact copy downloaded from the https://doi.org/10.1007/s11214-024-01082-1, which is Olkin et al. (2024) paper with a different set of authors, title, etc than specified in the PDS label. Are we missing the correct PDF or does the label need to be corrected and renamed? Or do we need both?