=============================================== NOTE: (1) First delivery of DonaldJohanson delivery, 2025-09-07. (2) Some of the document and calibration collections and inventory files only contain new/updated products or necessary products from prior versions. =============================================== Bundles/Collections Validated: urn:nasa:pds:lucy.leisa::2.0 urn:nasa:pds:lucy.leisa:calibration::2.0 urn:nasa:pds:lucy.leisa:data_donaldjohanson_calibrated::1.0 urn:nasa:pds:lucy.leisa:data_donaldjohanson_raw::1.0 urn:nasa:pds:lucy.leisa:document::2.0 urn:nasa:pds:lucy.llorri::3.0 urn:nasa:pds:lucy.llorri:calibration::3.0 urn:nasa:pds:lucy.llorri:data_didymos_partially_processed::2.0 urn:nasa:pds:lucy.llorri:data_didymos_raw::2.0 urn:nasa:pds:lucy.llorri:data_donaldjohanson_partially_processed::1.0 urn:nasa:pds:lucy.llorri:data_donaldjohanson_raw::1.0 urn:nasa:pds:lucy.ltes::2.0 urn:nasa:pds:lucy.ltes:data_donaldjohanson_calibrated::1.0 urn:nasa:pds:lucy.ltes:data_donaldjohanson_hkraw::1.0 urn:nasa:pds:lucy.ltes:data_donaldjohanson_raw::1.0 urn:nasa:pds:lucy.mission::2.0 urn:nasa:pds:lucy.mission:document::2.0 urn:nasa:pds:lucy.mvic::2.0 urn:nasa:pds:lucy.mvic:calibration::2.0 urn:nasa:pds:lucy.mvic:data_donaldjohanson_calibrated::1.0 urn:nasa:pds:lucy.mvic:data_donaldjohanson_raw::1.0 urn:nasa:pds:lucy.mvic:document::2.0 urn:nasa:pds:lucy.rss::2.0 urn:nasa:pds:lucy.rss:data_donaldjohanson_ion::1.0 urn:nasa:pds:lucy.rss:data_donaldjohanson_sff::1.0 urn:nasa:pds:lucy.rss:data_donaldjohanson_skyfreq::1.0 urn:nasa:pds:lucy.rss:data_donaldjohanson_trk234::1.0 urn:nasa:pds:lucy.ttcam::2.0 urn:nasa:pds:lucy.ttcam:data_donaldjohanson_calibrated::1.0 urn:nasa:pds:lucy.ttcam:data_donaldjohanson_raw::1.0 =============================================== Errors for: GLOBAL (all datasets) Any CERTIFIED and released data products (non-PDS4-label parts) should NOT be changed (i.e. checksums remain unchanged) during lien resolution; this includes the headers as well. If there may be any cases (for instance the before mentioned headers), please discuss them with SBN BEFORE release of the review data. Calibration and Document collection's child products appear to be hand edited and so should be checked for each delivery and not relied on for pipeline configuration control. There are errors due to silly hand made mistakes. To what level are these produced in the pipeline? Many of the bundle/collection products (i.e. bundle.xml or collection.xml) appear to have been hand edited. To what level are these produced by the pipeline? Need to determine how best to deliver versioned collections to SBN, which may not contain all products. --> Products that were not updated do not need to be redelivered, but the collection inventory files should still contain a full list of products (best copy usually), not just new products. In the DJ delivery, half the time this appears to have been done, but it was not done for lucy.llorri:calibration::3.0, lucy.mission:document:2.0, and lucy.mvic:document:2.0. SBN needs to produce and populate DOIs into collection products. How would the Lucy SOC want to do this? issue: Dinkinesh lien edits not carried over into DJ --> Ensure that all versioned product labels (bundle, collection, data, document, etc) found in the Dinkinesh delivery has also been updated in the same way in the DJ delivery. For instance the Modification_History for the Dinkinesh related VID is different in several cases and other edits due to Dinkinesh liens were not applied before updating for the DJ delivery. Most of these affected products include bundle.xml, {calibration,document}/collection.xml, and any calibration/* or document/* products that are now VID 2.0 or 3.0. Sanity check: I see that Brian Enke was added as an editor to the bundles. Should he be added to any of the child collections or products as well? Be sure to include the Funding_Acknowledgement class (it was removed in this delivery). The following collection products do not: -->lucy.leisa/calibration/collection.xml -->lucy.leisa/data_donaldjohanson_calibrated/collection.xml -->lucy.leisa/data_donaldjohanson_raw/collection.xml -->lucy.llorri/calibration/collection.xml -->lucy.llorri/data_didymos_partially_processed/collection.xml -->lucy.llorri/data_didymos_raw/collection.xml -->lucy.llorri/data_donaldjohanson_partially_processed/collection.xml -->lucy.llorri/data_donaldjohanson_raw/collection.xml -->lucy.ltes/data_donaldjohanson_calibrated/collection.xml -->lucy.ltes/data_donaldjohanson_hkraw/collection.xml -->lucy.ltes/data_donaldjohanson_raw/collection.xml -->lucy.mvic/calibration/collection.xml -->lucy.mvic/data_donaldjohanson_calibrated/collection.xml -->lucy.mvic/data_donaldjohanson_raw/collection.xml -->lucy.rss/data_donaldjohanson_ion/collection.xml -->lucy.rss/data_donaldjohanson_sff/collection.xml -->lucy.rss/data_donaldjohanson_skyfreq/collection.xml -->lucy.rss/data_donaldjohanson_trk234/collection.xml -->lucy.ttcam/data_donaldjohanson_calibrated/collection.xml -->lucy.ttcam/data_donaldjohanson_raw/collection.xml issue: In product labels, Reference_List references missing or --> For any product label (bundle, collection, data, etc), please add a (for external_reference) or (for internal_reference) to every reference entry stating very briefly mentioning what they are (and why they are included, which maybe self explanatory in the "what"). The user needs to know what these references are for; the LID/LIDVID may cue an advanced user, but they are not always clear. --> --> For instance, a reference to the SSR paper, might simply say "[instrument] SSR paper" --> --> For instance, a reference to a data product/collection state it is the source raw product or used in calibration, etc. issue: Inconsistent use of value for context objects: --> [Dinkinesh Lien] Observing_System_Component host name "Lucy Spacecraft" vs "Lucy". Currently found in: --> --> lucy.leisa/calibration/collection.xml --> --> lucy.llorri/bundle.xml --> --> lucy.mvic/calibration/collection.xml issue: vague collection (or DOI eligible) product Citation_Information.description --> The Citation_Information.description is used as the abstract for webpage and DOI meta data purposes (think ADS). Having text that gives a brief but uniquely descriptive description will help the user know what the given product contains. We would expect this to be no more than several sentences, but can be as brief as one, depending on the product. --> For the data collections recommend expanding more than simply saying it is ABC processing level data from instrument XYZ from the mission phase abc. --> For versioned collections, it is highly recommended to include at least a sentence explaining the difference from the prior version, for instance recalibrated or reprocessed, or adding additional files related to XZY. The Modification_History note may have some inspiration. Issue: Reference_List LIDVID vs LID usage --> You it is best to use a LID reference when the best version of a given product is sufficient to reference. For instance, you may want to point the user to the calibrated collection from the raw collection or to the instrument document collection or the SIS (assuming it is backwards compatible) for reference. Using LIDVID in these cases is not a problem, but not optimal. --> You should use a LIDVID reference when you need to reference the exact product version, usually when it is a source product. For instance, for when higher order (i.e. calibrated, derived, etc) products are referencing calibration products or source lower order (i.e. raw) product(s), they should be LIDVID references, not LID references since the user needs to know exactly which file was used to produce the product they are looking at. So Calibrated data products should use LIDVID for raw products and calibration products, and Calibrated collections should use LIDVID to reference a raw collection and/or calibration collection. Another common instance is for collection overview documents, were a future document version mostly likely will not directly apply to the current version. When you use a LID reference it assumes the most recent VID of that calibration or raw product, which may not actually be the correct product a few years down the road. --> --> [Dinkinesh Lien reworded] The calibrated and Partially Processed data products for the Reference_List currently use LID instead of LIDVID references to the raw and calibration products. The SIS LID reference may be fine if not dependent on calibration information. The raw data products correctly use LID references. Issue: Reference_List inheritance --> Items listed in a product Reference_List are not inherited up or down (bundle <=> collection <=> child product). If a reference should be cited for a collection, it should be included in the collection product, not assumed to be there if it is referenced in the bundle product. Similarly if an important paper, say the SSR paper is cited in all the data products, it should probably also be cited in the collection product. The same is true for raw & calibrated products with their corresponding collection product (except convert to collection instead of individual data product references). --> For a practical note, please note that SBN-UMD makes the best effort to include all citations (should be found in the Reference_List for automation) in the DOI meta data for each DOIs we publish, but these need to show up at the level the DOI is being produced, which in most cases are at the collection level. This is the same for the other Citation_Information fields. 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. L’LORRI appears to be the only instrument that uses this. files: 'bundle.xml' --> [Dinkinsh lien] Suggest to remove the PDS4 jargon, "Bundle", from Identification_Area.title and replace with "Archive" or something similar. In the DJ delivery, this has been done for L'LORRI and L'TES already, but for Dinkinesh it was done for LEISA and MVIC, but was reversed in DJ. --> [Dinkinesh lien]: For the instrument bundles, please update the Citation_Information.description to mention that they includes more than just "data products". Many of these bundles include calibration and document products as well. The RSS bundle description is generic enough to encompass all such products where as the others all say "all the operational data products". --> Is the Context_Area.Time_Coordinates is relevant to the bundle? Currently only three bundles contain it (leisa, ltes, mission). Please either remove or add to all bundles. If adding, please ensure all Context_Area.Time_Coordinates values encompass the entire span of all collections in the bundle, not just the current delivery (currently lucy.leisa values are only for DJ, not DJ and Dinkinesh). --> Unlike the other instrument bundles, L'TES, MVIC, and RSS do not have a Reference_List area. The other three contains references I would not expect, like to the mission:document and [instrument]:document collections, but did find the expected the [instrument]_ssr. Recommend replacing the [instrument]:document collection with the [instrument]_sis and replacing the mission:document with lucy.mission:document:lucy_mission_info. In any event, please be consistent between instruments. files: 'data*/collection.xml' --> [Dinkinesh lien] Suggest removing PDS4 jargon, "Collection", from Identification_Area.title. For DJ, this should be done for all but Radio Science. In latest Dinkinesh delivery, only Ralph as was fixed. --> For all data* collections, recommend adding a LID reference to the instrument document collection and external DOI reference and/or internal_reference to the SSR --> For the data*raw collections, suggest adding a LID reference to the corresponding data*{calibrated,partially_processed} collections --> For the data*{calibrated,partially_processed} collections, please add a LIDVID reference to the corresponding data*raw and calibration (if applicable) collections and calibration description document or paper (DOI) (if any). files: Calibrated or Partially Processed data products --> If the SIS does not describe calibration process, an LIDVID reference should be added to said document, or an external/internal reference added to said paper. --> For each File_Area_Observational.Header, please add a name and/or description, to specify which header is associated with which data object. For instance the L'LORRI observational image FITS header, Main File header, or something similar. Currently there is no clue to the user (aside from order and offset) what header goes with which object. files: 'readme.txt' --> Just a suggestion for thought. These files (especially RSS) are only starting to get long. After more target encounters, let along any cruise phases, the list will be almost unwieldy to read. I would suggest finding a way to consolidate it, perhaps by collection types (document, calibration, raw, calibrated, ion, etc). If you make it generic enough (remove mission segments/phases), you may never need to update it again, until there is a new data or collection type, or you can mention at the top there are collections for the following phases, and it will be a small edit to add another phase each bundle version. =============================================== Errors for: lucy.leisa Author name mismatch? --> "Lunsford, A." vs "Lunsford, H." --> --> Instance of "H." in document collection. file: 'bundle.xml' --> The Context_Area.Time_Coordinates are only for DJ, not for the entire range of collections (including Dinkinesh). Are the optional Time_Coordinates really appropriate for the bundle? --> Please provide the missing File_Area_Text for the readme.txt file. file: 'readme.txt' --> The Calibration section only mentions three of the five types, leaving out BPM and Wave map. --> The Calibrated collection sections say they are "partially processed images", but it should say "calibrated". directory: 'calibration/' --> The lucy.leisa/calibration collection does not conform with Dinkinesh lien addressed delivery. In the Dinkinesh lien resolved delivery all the fflat and space LIDs had the run version number removed from the LID (example: urn:nasa:pds:lucy.leisa:calibration:lei_0752129330_02298_fflat_03::1.0 to urn:nasa:pds:lucy.leisa:calibration:lei_0752129330_02298_fflat::1.0). This was to conform with standing practice to not include it, but also because the data products referencing these calibration products assumed it didn't either.  But these run version numbers have been reintroduced in the calibration products in this delivery, and the DJ data products cannot properly reference them as a result.  Please fix. SBN-TB used the following mac csh code to fix the files for the peer review: sed -i '' 's#_0[0-9] Update the Reference_List item for collection_overview VID from 1.0 to 2.0, to match the updated overview file's VID. file: 'calibration/collection_inventory.csv' --> Update the LIDVID item for collection_overview's VID from 1.0 to 2.0, to match the updated overview file's VID. file: 'calibration/collection_overview.txt' --> Thank you for adding the paragraph (or lines?) describing which space calibration files are for Dinkinesh vs DJ. But they read as if they are one paragraph. Also, they say they are only for space calibration files, but the description could also apply to the Fringe Files. Suggest rewording in such a way to make it a table, or separating out the lines so they don't read as one sentence. files: 'calibration/lei*.xml' --> [Dinkinesh lien] Provide valid Display_Settings where missing to eliminate PDS4viewer warning about display settings. --> Should the Array_2D_Image objects have a unit? --> Is the "Spectral Cube" really appropriate for a Array_2D_Image? file: 'data_donaldjohanson_*/collection_overview.xml' --> The LID for these files says dinkinesh, but it should be for donaldjohanson. Please correct the logical_identifier. file: 'data_donaldjohanson_calibrated/collection_overview.txt' --> line 3 says these are "raw images products" but they are calibrated. file: 'data_donaldjohanson_raw/lei_*.xml' --> 10 of 28 products reference in their Reference_List a calibrated version of the raw product which does not exist. Assuming the products were not calibrated, please update the pipeline code to check to see if the calibrated product exists before adding a reference. Please remove such references. file: 'data_donaldjohanson_raw/lei_*.xml' --> [Dinkinesh lien] Please add units. This was fixed in the Dinkinesh lien addressed delivery. file: 'document/collection_overview.{txt,xml}' --> The document/collection_overview.txt is empty. The xml file says it is version 1.0, but I would expect it to be version 2.0. The collection.xml reference_list expects a version 2.0 overview file, but the inventory says it is version 1.0. Was including a new collection_overview a mistake? I see no new files, only versioned products. Either (1) include an updated overview file and overview label, and update the LIDVID reference in the collection.xml and collection_inventory.csv files or (2) drop the new overview files, and rely on the copy found in VID 1.0 of this collection. --> author_list entry: "Lunsford, H." => "Lunsford, A." =============================================== Errors for: lucy.llorri file: 'bundle.xml' --> typo in Modification_Detail "theDonaldjohanson" => "the Donaldjohanson" file: 'calibration/collection.xml' --> Please add back the Citation_Information.description from prior versions as it was more verbose and useful. --> Funding_Acknowledgement removed? --> changed from Derived to Raw. Is this correct? --> The number of for the inventory should be updated from 2 to the correct number. --> The inventory file needs to include all v1.0 products. Missing the collection_overview, default_config, and two dinky_flat LIDVIDs. file: 'calibration/collection_inventory.csv' --> When versioning a collection, the collection inventory files should contain a full list of products (best copy usually), not just new or updated products. Please add back all the products from v2.0 of this collection. file: 'calibration/collection_overview.txt' --> This file should be versioned (from dinkinesh) to include mention of the new dj_auto_flat files and update the statements about the flats being valid thru dinkinesh. Don't forget to update any VID references in the collection label and inventory file. file: 'lucy.llorri/calibration/dj_auto_flat_1x1.xml' --> The has the text ".xml" in it that should be removed. file: 'lucy.llorri/data_didymos_*/collection.xml' --> For the raw colleciton, the Reference_List reference to the overview document is malformed ("overview" mispelled and missing double colons before VID). Please fix from "urn:nasa:pds:lucy.llorri:data_didymos_raw:collection_ovrview:1.0" to "urn:nasa:pds:lucy.llorri:data_didymos_raw:collection_overview::1.0". --> Why was the target urn:nasa:pds:context:target:satellite.65803_didymos.dimorphos added? It was not listed in version 1.0 of the collection and is not found in any of the data product labels. --> The collection overview document (at least for the raw, pp has issues), mentions a description of the LLORRI DART observations being in the User's Guide V2.0. I would highly recommend adding a LIDVID reference to this document in the Reference_List of each of the two Didymos data collection products. --> Please add a single sentence to the Citation_Information.description explaining the major difference between V1.0 and V2.0 of the collection; something similar to the modification history entry should be sufficient. We want to differentiate this data collection version from the prior one. file: 'lucy.llorri/data_donaldjohanson_*/collection.xml' --> [Dinkinesh lien] You have the purpose <purpose>Science</purpose> but Navigation in the PDS4 XML data labels. Multiple purposes can be added if applicable. This was fixed in Dinkinesh, but the same situation is for the data_donaldjohanson collections, but not fixed here as well. file: 'lucy.llorri/data_donaldjohanson_raw/collection_inventory.csv' --> The collection_overview entry is missing the required VID. file: 'data_didymos_partially_processed/collection_overview.txt' --> First line and first overview paragraph describe Dinkinesh, not Didymos. Please correct. --> Second overview paragraph describes the DonaldJohanson closest approach, which should be removed. Perhaps you may want to add the approximate distance to Didymos. file: 'data_didymos_raw/collection_overview.txt' --> First paragraph mentions "Lucy Mission Didymos Encounter". Can this really be described as an encounter or is it remote observations. --> First paragraph typo: citing a document title, "LLORRI" => "L'LORRI", per pdf document title (unfortunately, the archived xml title for this pdf document is not quite correct, not even mentioning Didymos) --> Second overview paragraph describes the DonaldJohanson closest approach, which should be removed. Perhaps you may want to add the approximate distance to Didymos. files: 'data_*/l*.xml' --> [Dinkinesh lien] Add the target NAIF ID if applicable. For example, (152830) Dinkinesh it is 920152830 (TARGETID in the FITS header). <geom:Orbiter_Identification>/<geom:Geometry_Target_Identification>/<geom:body_spice_name> --> Please add the sb:Quality_Map class to help describe the meaning of each value in the quality map which is not described in the xml labels. =============================================== Errors for: lucy.ltes file: 'bundle.xml' --> Missing the File_Area_Text class for the readme.txt file. file: 'data_donaldjohanson_hkraw/collection.xml' --> The <title> needs to be differentiated from the raw data collection. Suggest changing it from "Raw Data" to "Raw Housekeeping Data" as was done with the Dinkinesh delivery. --> Citation_Information.description (i.e. abstract) needs to make it clear it is not the raw products, but the raw housekeeping products. The description in the Dinkinesh delivery was much more verbose and useful and so I suggest you bring over that text and update accordingly. file: 'data_donaldjohanson_calibrated/collection_overview.xml' --> The LID for this file says dinkinesh, but it should be for donaldjohanson. Please correct the logical_identifier. file: 'data_donaldjohanson_calibrated/tes_0798357094_donaldjohanson_sci_03.xml' --> The Modification_History has been dropped. Please add it back and ensure the pipeline produces it (it was present in Dinkinesh). --> PIPELINE CONCERN: Why has the calseqid changed from a Array_1D (as found in Dinkinesh) to a Stream_Text in DJ? --> PIPELINE CONCERN: Why has the source_files object moved down 5 places as compared to Dinkinesh? --> PIPELINE CONCERN: Why has the Special_Constant n/a 9999 dropped from the incidence_angle, lat, lon, phase_angle, ? --> PIPELINE CONCERN: Fixed typo is back: (line 2006) "Scan length in seconds with possible values of 2, 1, 0.5." => "Scan length in seconds with possible values of 2, 1, or 0.5." --> [Dinkinesh Lien]: Lien fixed in Dinkinesh regarding "ticks", but back here. Better text has been removed on line 2053, expect: "<description>Spacecraft clock sub-seconds of each observation in the data product. Each tick is 1/65536 sec.</description>. Also the unit has changed from "ticks" to "s/65536" --> Why does the proc:software_version_id for UDP says "?"? Should this even be here for calibrated product? There is an additional software line for CDP which has remained unchanged, version 1.8. file: 'data_donaldjohanson_hkraw/tes_0797932680_00000_eng_01.xml' --> PIPELINE CONERN: The Identification_Area.title should probably include "housekeeping" to differentiate from the raw products found in the raw collections. This was clarified in the description in the Dinkinesh collection, but now the description says it is a "science data product". Which is it? --> PIPELINE CONCERN: The purpose is now "Science" instead of "Engineering" as it was in Dinkinesh. --> The Target_Identification is now urn:nasa:pds:context:target:calibrator.unk whereas in Dinkinesh it was urn:nasa:pds:context:target:calibrator.non_science. Which should it be? --> [Dinkinesh Lien]: Lien fixed in Dinkinesh regarding "ticks", but back here. Better text has been removed on line 2053, expect: "<description>Spacecraft clock sub-seconds of each observation in the data product. Each tick is 1/65536 sec.</description>. Also the unit has changed from "ticks" to "s/65536". This affects the sclk_sub object. files: 'data_donaldjohanson_raw/tes*.xml' --> The Citation_Information.description in the Dinkinesh lien addressed copy added the word "Uncalibrated" to the beginning, but now it is gone. --> [Dinkinesh Lien]: Lien fixed in Dinkinesh regarding "ticks", but back here. Better text has been removed on line 2053, expect: "<description>Spacecraft clock sub-seconds of each observation in the data product. Each tick is 1/65536 sec.</description>. Also the unit has changed from "ticks" to "s/65536". This affects the sclk_sub object. =============================================== Errors for: lucy.mission file: 'bundle.xml' --> Update the <publication_year> from 2024 to be 2025. file: 'readme.txt' --> typo: "Contains collection contains" => "Contains" file: 'document/collection.xml' --> Update the <publication_year> from 2024 to be 2025. --> No need for a DOI for this collection. The only thing that should have a DOI, currently, is the coordinate system document. The other products in the collection are copies of published papers. --> [Dinkinesh lien] Move the DOIs to the individual papers. These DOIs should be in the document labels, as their <description> value, "Original external source of this Open Access document", suggests, not in the collection product label. file: 'document/collection_inventory.csv' --> When versioning a collection, the collection inventory files should contain a full list of products (best copy usually), not just new or updated products. Please add back all the products from v1.0 of this collection. file: 'document/Donaldjohanson_Coordinate_System_Description_v1.xml' --> There is a reference at the end of this PDF paper. If it is a citation, than please add to the Reference_List in this label. I believe this is DOI 10.1007/s10569-010-9320-4. --> SBN should create a DOI for this file as opposed to the collection itself. =============================================== Errors for: lucy.mvic file: 'bundle.xml' --> Missing the File_Area_Text class for the readme.txt file. file: 'readme.txt' --> The Calibrated collection sections say they are "partially processed images", but it should say "calibrated". file: 'calibration/collection.xml' --> The Modification_Detail date and description for version 1.0 has changed to match that of version 2.0, but it should be for the Dinkinesh delivery. Please fix. --> <comment> values were added to the internal_references in the Reference_List in Dinkinesh, but removed here. Please add back. files: 'calibration/mvi*.xml' --> [Dinkinesh lien] Add units where appropriate. Fixed in Dinkinesh, but all units have been removed. files: 'data_donaldjohanson_*/collection_overview.xml' --> The LID for these files says dinkinesh, but it should be for donaldjohanson. Please correct the logical_identifier. file: 'data_donaldjohanson_raw/collection_inventory.csv' --> The LID for the overview document is misspelled. "collection_ovrview" => "collection_overview" file: 'data_donaldjohanson_raw/mvi_*.xml' --> 5 of 10 products reference in the Reference_List a calibrated version of the raw product which does not exist. Assuming the products were not calibrated, please update the pipeline code to check to see if the calibrated product exists before adding a reference. Please remove such non-existant references. file: 'data_donaldjohanson_calibrated/mvi_*.xml' --> [Dinkinesh Lien] Add unit to the primary image cube. This was resolved in Dinkinesh. Double check that the other Arrays should not have units. They are expected. file: 'document/collection.xml' --> Update the <publication_year> from 2024 to be 2025. --> The Citation_Information.doi is for the prior version of this collection. It should be replaced with a new DOI value. --> The inventory file is incomplete, only containing the updated product, not including the non-versioned products. file: 'document/collection_inventory.csv' --> When versioning a collection, the collection inventory files should contain a full list of products (best copy usually), not just new or updated products. Please add back all the products from v1.0 of this collection. =============================================== Errors for: lucy.rss Issue: Context object name mismatch --> The lucy.rss context object should include the alternate name of "Lucy Radio Science Subsystem" or change the delivered product labels' value to "Lucy Radio Science". Ask PDS-EN for including this alternate name if desired to use it, but submitting a GetHub ticket. SBN can support making this request. issue: processing_level --> There appears to be confusion about what the correct processing level for each data collection and data product is, based on the last review Dinkinesh delivery, lien addressed delivery and the current DJ delivery. During Dinkinesh lien resolution, the review response to a similar lien said that ion data should be raw. Please confirm what is correct and fix if necessary. DJ Dinkinesh (data labels) ion Calibrated Raw (Partially Processed) sff Derived Raw (Derived) skyfreq Calibrated Calibrated trk234 Raw Raw issue: inconsistent Observing_System_Component --> The Observing_System_Component does not match between the collection.xml file and the data product labels in the collection. --> Please note you can have more than one Observing_System, one for Lucy and one for DSN. --> Sometimes there is an Observing_System that says Lucy is the host with lucy.rss and dsn.rss as its instruments (like in the skyfreq collection). But the dsn.rss is not an instrument for Lucy. --> Sometimes only the Lucy spacecraft is listed as the only observing system. file: 'data_donaldjohanson_*/collection.xml' --> [Dinkinish Lien reworded] The Target_Identification should not be DJ. In general these should reflect the primary target(s) or targets of note, observed and listed in the data product labels. This was fixed in Dinkinesh, but appears again here. --> All but the Ion collection has a reference in the Reference_List to urn:nasa:pds:lucy.rss:document:rss_info::1.0. But this LID is unknown. --> --> Joel suspects it is for the SIS, urn:nasa:pds:lucy.rss:document:rss_sis files: 'data_donaldjohanson_skyfreq/L*.xml' --> [Dinkinesh lien] labels contain internal reference to small forces. i think this is an oversight and actually belongs in the SFF labels. <Internal_Reference> <lid_reference>urn:nasa:pds:orex.radioscience:document:naf018</lid_reference> <reference_type>data_to_document</reference_type> <comment> Although this document does not explicitly pertain to Lucy, its content is still applicable. Until a new version of this document is created for Lucy, this reference will have to suffice. </comment> </Internal_Reference> --> [Dinkinesh Lien] label <description> makes reference to a SOURCE_PRODUCT_ID but I can't find that anywhere else in the label. the description also makes reference to S-band which Lucy is not capable of. Can the description be updated? --> [Dinkinesh Lien] The Primary_Result_Summary.description states "The SOURCE_PRODUCT_ID mentioned in the label header above links to the different data files used for processing of the DOPPLER output file. ..." Where is this? --> --> This appears to be PDS3 jargon and text from a PDS3 label. Please correct this for the PDS4 environment. --> [Dinkinesh lien] Many fields' descriptions describe special values. Add Special_Constants to those fields to allow automated handling of those. Examples: TRANSMIT FREQUENCY - CONSTANT TERM: -999999999.999999 TRANSMIT FREQUENCY - LINEAR TERM: -99999.999999 OBSERVED X-BAND ANTENNA FREQUENCY: -999999999.999999 SIGNAL LEVEL: -999.9 DIFFERENTIAL DOPPLER: -999.999999 SIGMA OBSERVED ANTENNA FREQUENCY: -99999.999999 SIGNAL QUALITY: -999.9 SIGMA SIGNAL LEVEL: -999.9 files: 'data_donaldjohanson_trk234/lucy_2025*.xml' --> [Dinkinesh Lien] The descriptions for fields ul_zheight_corr and dl_zheight_corr in many tables describe -99.0 as a special value. Add Special_Constants to those fields to allow automated handling of those. =============================================== Errors for: lucy.ttcam Correct Author: "Zhao, A." => "Zhao, Y." per Sept 8 thru Sept 10th email chain between SBN:TB and Lucy:JP. files: 'data_*/t*.xml' --> The Citation_Information.description is nearly identical in text, but is identical in content between raw and calibrated. Suggest adding processing level in the description. --> For the calibrated images, the Bad Pixel Map values are programmatically hidden in the <description> may be able to be mapped using the sb:Quality_Map_Definition class. Clarify with SBN A. Raugh if there are any issues. --> [Dinkinesh Lien reworded] For the raw products, Delete the first block of the following text, since it is duplicated unnecessarily. Otherwise is the first block missing further information to make it unique from the second block? <proc:Process> <proc:name>Lucy Data Processing Pipeline</proc:name> <proc:process_owner_name>Lucy Science Operations Center</proc:process_owner_name> <proc:process_owner_institution_name>Southwest Research Institute</proc:process_owner_institution_name> </proc:Process> <proc:Process> <proc:name>Lucy Data Processing Pipeline</proc:name> <proc:process_owner_name>Lucy Science Operations Center</proc:process_owner_name> <proc:process_owner_institution_name>Southwest Research Institute</proc:process_owner_institution_name> <proc:Software> <proc:software_id>UDP</proc:software_id> <proc:software_version_id>1.0.10</proc:software_version_id> </proc:Software> </proc:Process> --> [Dinkinish Lien] Does the PDS4 attribute msss_cam_mh:instrument_mode_id refer to the fits header T2CAI001= 1 / camera: 1=DVR, 2=test image injection in the port IMAGE MINI-HEADER section? If yes, then replace the number by the description text if possible. --> --> Lucy-SOC response: no msss_cam_mh:instrument_mode_id corresponds to T2CAI012 as noted in the SIS. This is the mode of image or video readout. will take the comment under advisement to translate to text. --> --> SBN-TB: Recommend a comment be added as it is not found in DJ delivery. --> [Dinkinish Lien Reworded] Several observations are related to standard functional test or calibrations, but several of the PDS4 XML label attributes do not reflect this: --> --> <purpose> should be Calibration, not Science --> --> Ensure that the Target <name> (in Target_Identification and geom:Geometry_Target_Identification), Target <type, Target internal_reference, <lucy:target_fov_name> do not reflect DJ as the target, but the correct target. files: 'data_*/collection_overview.txt' --> The text files contain paper references Bell et al. (2023) and Zhao et al. (2024). Please resolve these references in the text. One way of doing this is adding a reference list to the bottom of the document.