
	SDAST Chat Meeting #46, Thursday May 31st 2001

PARTICIPANTS: Peter Kretschmar, Carol Anne Oxborrow, Niels Joergen Westergaard,
	Stefan Larsson
	
AGENDA:
	1) AI's past and present
	2) GTI status bit: is it used - can we dispose of it?
	3) Agenda items for next week's SDAST meeting
	4) Deliveries - how, when, what
	5) AOB _ any input for monthly report????

ACTION ITEMS: none

**** Logging Started : Thu May 31 09:58:59 MEST 2001
> Hello NJW, just you and me so far - I hope everyone else got my email. END
<njw> HI, hope we can get startet soon, since I have to leave before 11 o'clock END
> I'll ring Peter ENND
*** peter (~pkretsch@crab.unige.ch) has joined channel #jemxadr
<peter> Good Morning!
<peter> Sami has just excused himself via mail ...
<peter> END
> Hi Peter, what news of S'n'S ? END
<peter> S'n'S?
> Stefan'n'Sami - the Guys from the Frozen North END
> Okay, let's get started. AIs: any comments? END
<peter> No news from Stefan, Sami apparently is not in. END
<peter> No comment from me on AIs. END
> I think we'll close AI13.17 after tomorrow's calibration meeting NJW END
> AI18.13 PK/CAO	June 2001 Investigate a tool to write diagnostic data into
OPEN			-RAW data structure formats

> Peter, can this one be closed, since you discovered that there's already
> and ISDC tool for doing this, or some such thing? END
<peter> No, that was on a different AI, already closed. For this one I still have to think. 
<peter> We should probably state that the action should be closed by a sketch of such a tool at our upcoming meeting. END
> Will do. END
> AI45_1 is already closed, so that concludes the AIs. Any more comments? END
<peter> No END
> Next: what abour removing the `outside GTI' status flag in the -COR
> data structures. This is a bit flag on the STATUS bit that, nominally,
> at least according to jemx.h should signal that a given event is
> outside the general merged GTI's. Peter suggests we scrap this since
> a) GTIs aren't available in j_correction and
> b) everyone should use the GTIs themselves, also possibly using
> GTIs defined by themselves, and so get better flexibility. The question
> is: has anyone already started using this flag? I haven't for one:
> what about you guys? If it's just an unused placeholder, we can
> remove it from jemx.h now. END
<njw> Hi, sorry for my absence, just had a visitor but now I'm back END
<njw> No flag used by me END
> I'll write an email to S'n'S to check they're not using it before
> taking it out of jemx.h. END
<peter> The 'correct' way to go isto read GTIs with DAl3HK and then use them in DAL3JEMX calls. END
> Next:Agenda items for next week. Suggestions please. END
<peter> Several items
<peter> * Integration status, V2 development, integration & test schedule, V3 schedule 
<peter> * JEM-X science analysis scripts - a presentation
<peter> * ISDC's ideas on offline science analyis
<peter> END
<njw> Peter, could you mail me an example of a script ? END
> I'd like to add a bit on DDD aspects of the ADD, now that the ADD
<njw> I think we also need a short report of the work on the background stuff END
> will be functioning as our DDD as well END
<peter> Good points both END
<njw> I can't think of more points right now END
> Nor can I: will you make the draft agenda, or shall I NJW? END
<njw> Well, perhaps the calibration. We could have a discussion of that e.g. with
<peter> For S'n'S a brief H/W status would probably be nice.
<njw> respect to the required number of counts (for inflight) END
> Yes, that's a good idea too. Also, should we discuss the setting up
> and running of a mini data center here at DSRI as an extension of
> the discussion at the Science Meeting last week? Should SDAST
> contribute to this? END
<njw> The ISSW could also exist in versions that cover more features that the
<njw> one delivered to ISDC, so SDAST is a natural contributor to such a data center END
> So let's discuss our possible roll at the meeting. END
*** larsson (~larsson@130.226.216.181) has joined channel #jemxadr
> Okay, if there's no more suggestions for the agenda, let's
<peter> To NJW: ISDC actually hopes to always have the complete ISSW at least with regard to things useful for users. END
> move on. Hi Stefan! We're just finishing suggestions for agendat
> items for the meeting next week: do you have any suggestions? END
<larsson> No. END
<njw> Peter, I understand that, but there could be a testing period before an
> Okay, let's move on to deliveries: I'll be delivering j_prp_status_table
<njw> official release is deemed safe END
> this week, and hopefully, j_calib_gain_fitting next week. END
<peter> That would be very useful, indeed. END
<njw> I'm testing j_ima_src_find at the moment and I can probably deliver tomorrow END
<peter> I have redelivered j_bin_evts_spectra and j_bin_bkg_spectra in consolidated form. For the second, another redelivery will be done in a  few minutes. END
<peter> To NJW: I'm keeping my fingers crossed - I'm waiting for that one ... END
<peter> This reminds me: I would like to rediscuss the connection j_ima_src_find -> j_src_***
<njw> As for j_ima_cor_intens you must wait till next week - but I assume it is
<njw> not so important right now. END
<peter> That's OK
<peter> About j_src_***: 
> What about you PEter - when are you re-delivering the j_binning components? END
<peter> The other j_bin_*** stuff may be delayed until after the Consortium Meeting, i.e. July.
<larsson> I will redeliver j_src_spectra and j_src_lc 12june. Is that OK Peter?
<larsson> END
<peter> Just OK, it's quite late to feel comfortable. Any later and I will not be able to show a working 'SA' script at the
<peter> Consortium Meeting June 26/27. From June 13 to 22 I will also need to verify end-to-end test data from the JEM-X and
<peter> OMC at Alenia.
<peter> END
<larsson> OK, if I feel confident about it you will get j_src_spectra a little earlier. END
<peter> That would be very useful. END
<peter> Just as a note: I'm still waiting for Sami's redeliveries. END
<peter> He redelivered "consolidated" versions, but I found problems with those as well ... END
<peter> Btw, it's time for your contributions to the MR :-) END
<njw> Delivered consolidated versions of j_ima_shadowgram and j_ima_basic_recon END
<peter> Please as email - makes my life easier. END
<njw> Sure END
<peter> Can we briefly talk about the connection j_ima_src_find -> j_src_*** ? END
<njw> Y
> I'll send you what I have for the monthly report later today Peter. END
<peter> The problem I have is that j_src_*** requires that the coordinates of all sources are found in instrumental coordinates within JMXi-SRCL-RES.
<peter> Normally, this is OK, but (as we have seen now) it has the following disadvantages:
<peter> (1) If j_ima_src_find has a problem we can not substitute a known list of sources instead.
<peter> (2) There is no way for the user to force the JEM-X ISSW to derive spectra/lightcurves for a source that
<peter> is not autamtically found by j_ima_src_find. END
<peter> Comments: Stefan, Niels Jrgen? END
<larsson> One option if naturally that I dont use instrument coordinates
<larsson> which is what I prefer from a principal point of view.
<njw> Another option is to let j_ima_src_find read the catalog and update SRCL-RES
<njw> with a notification that the source has not been found. But this required an
* njw extra column END
<larsson> Another is that _src_find take ...(just what NJ wrote now...) END
<njw> Actually Stefan's option 1 is cleaner END
<njw> I can deliver code to do the transformation WCS -> instrument END
> Shall we put this on the meeting agenda, so that we can work out
<njw> Peter ? END
> the details clearly? END
<larsson> Yes. END
<njw> OK END
<peter> I would prefer Stefan's first option too. It makes things better insulated. And yes put it on the agenda. 
<njw> Sorry, I have to leave now for other obligations, bye END
<peter> Btw: for your next delivery, you can stay "the old way". I'd rather have working code with some shortcomings than wait longer .. END
*** njw has left channel #jemxadr : (njw)
<larsson> I will Peter. END
> Okay, we'll discuss this further at the meeting. END
> Next: AOB, and anything for the monthly report? END
<peter> Nothing really from my side. Shall I just compile it like last time or should I send you my inputs and you send me a consolidated version?
<larsson> Complete and submit. END
<larsson> I was interupted here.
> No, I'll send my contributions to you Peter, and you  can do what you
> want with them. AOB anyone? END
<larsson> I dont have much details, just done some more coding.
<peter> No AOB. END
<larsson> Nothing more from here now. END
<peter> Shall we say goodby for today? END
> Yes, have a good weekend everyone. END
