
 Weekly Chat Meeting #53: Thursday 15th November 2001


 Participants: Carol Anne Oxborrow, Peter Kretschmar
 
 Subjects discussed: Using JMXi-INST-STA in j_ical_frss
 	
 Action Items: None
 
**** Logging Started : Thu Nov 15 10:20:56 MET 2001
*** peter (~pkretsch@isdcul10.unige.ch) has joined channel #jemxadr
<peter> Good Morning Carol Anne!
<peter> I've just sent you an email regarding your INST-STA questions. END
> Hello, Peter, I'm just getting to grips with Reiner's code for OSM, to
> try and find out how to make interactive tools: it's quite daunting to get
> started on all this, but my biggest fear is still having to make all the
> test data.  END
<peter> Well, Reiner is somewhat surprised to see someone trying to do this 
without a thorough training session at ISDC. END
<peter> Regarding JMXi-INST-STA, I've just noted another problem:
<peter> If I'm not mistaken, this is part of PREPARED data. This means that the 
information contained in ScWs belonging to Guest Observervers is _not_ available 
for you until the prprietary period is over.
<peter> While from the POV of writing your tool, this does not really matter - 
you just don't get to see those ScWs in the Index,
<peter> it means you would have a history with gaps ... END
> All in all it looks like the rough averaging over each revolution (which is
> 3 days after all) is what I should aim for first time around. It'll 
> introduce noise, but like I said it's only the very long term trend we're
> really interested in. END
> Since the DPE code is written so that the grey fillter always pops back up
> to `31' when this is feasible, the tendancy will be for this to be the
> dominating value over any given revolution. END
<peter> It should also be possible for ISDC to have the INST-STA in the 'public' 
section of data, but I wanted to raise the flag that this is not automatically 
the case. END
> At the start of j_ical_frss there will be an option to regenerate the
> mission-long table of per-revolution averages, or not. But just the thought
> of hunting through all those instances of INST-STA gives me the willies. END
> I'll go and hunt up NJW - it's already 10 minutes after start time - don't
> you boys read my emails? END
> NJW's in a meeting. I'll ring Sami. END
> Sounds like Sami's not in yet. It's only 10.45 after all. So how about we
> both get back to our work. I'm doing ADD and starting on interactive tools
> sort of consecutively at the moment - when I get frustrated with one I do
> some of the other for  a while. END
<peter> OK. I still have a lot of work to do, to get the full JEM-X script set 
up and running - my main problem is that I need to create more modern test data 
first. END
<peter> Probably I'll now update the ADD before I have actually tested the 
scripts. It's some parameter name changes at this stage,
> According to my handy filofax timezones map, it's 11.45 in Helsinki. END
<peter> the more substantial changes have already been submitted to you. END
> Yes, I've seen your updates, especially the figures, and everything looks
> good. I just hope everyone else can manage to do something before Monday.END
> Let's get back to work - it's hasn't been wasted time - I'm convinced that
<peter> OK, we'll probably exchange emails soon. END
> I should go with the rough averaging of the source strengths now! END
> Have a good weekend: we're having a new glass door fitted to our brand new
> oven for the second time on Saturday - we've already head two doors shatter
> with only a small amount of heating. It isn't quite the sort of entertaining
> I was hoping to do with the new cooker! END
<peter> Maybe actually heating the oven is to be considered abuse
<peter> you should just let it sit there and contemplate it's beauty ;-) ... END
<peter> its beauty! 
> THAT's what we were doing when the first door went! END
> Chat with you again next week. Tell Reiner thanks for pointing me to one
<peter> I will. END
> of his easier components - it's very instructive. Goodbye! END
<peter> Good bye! END
*** Signoff: peter (ircII/tkirc)
