LCO IMACS and Swope Raw, Calibrated, Derived Data and Documentation Liens ========================================================================= Documentation ============= file: lco_dart_sis.pdf --> LCO SIS - no separate table for IMACS calibrated data fits headers? --> LCO SIS - residual comment page 10 --> SIS file is in editing mode, not yet cleaned. --> "NASA's Double Asteroid Redirection Test (DART) will be the first space". will be → is throughout document. --> Reference the sis file in the *_overview.txt --> "Aperture photometry was performed on Didymos and reference stars on each frame, using a variety of aperture sizes that were then selected based on image quality conditions for the night along with minimized photometric uncertainties." What was the standard of picking the image quality? Is it recorded somewhere? --> Instrument and telescope description? --> "manufactured by E2V to produce a 8192 x 8192 pixel mosaic." a → an --> The PDFs could benefit from a auto batch edit correction for small format issues, such as, "insert a space between words and parentheses", "add a comma after all the e.g. and i.g.", "remove commas before ands" and spell check for small typos. --> "Similarly for the LCO Swope.." add comma after similarly --> File is PDF/A-3a compliant, but must be 1a or 1b, not 3a. file: collection_data_lcoimacsddp_overview.txt --> Explicitly define the photometric system of the photometry. Are aperture sizes recorded anywhere? Sloan-r? converted to R? file: collection_data_lcoswopeddp_overview.txt --> Explicitly define the photometric system of the photometry. file: overview*.txt --> give over view of the data taken (e.g. Data were acquired from xxxx to yyyy.) --> These files describe the file naming convention. File naming should not matter in PDS4. If any of this information is not found in a label, it should be put there. It does appear that the information is present, but should be double checked. --> For the DDP collections, in the last full sentence, it says the ascii tables are in "the following format." Please replace the period with a semi-colon. --> For the DDP collections, there are multiple references cited, but no where are the references resolved. Please add them to the end of this document. XML Labels ========== EBT dictionary errors: --> [error.label.schema] line 131, 101: cvc-elt.3.1: Attribute 'http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance,nil' must not appear on element 'ebt:coordinate_system_equinox', because the {nillable} property of 'ebt:coordinate_system_equinox' is false. [10158 occurrences within 10158 files] --> --> Example: data_lcoimacscal/ut220702/rift1034c2_220702.xml (line 131) --> [error.label.schema] line 131, 101: cvc-type.3.1.1: Element 'ebt:coordinate_system_equinox' is a simple type, so it cannot have attributes, excepting those whose namespace name is identical to 'http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance' and whose [local name] is one of 'type', 'nil', 'schemaLocation' or 'noNamespaceSchemaLocation'. However, the attribute, 'nilReason' was found. --> --> Example: data_lcoimacscal/ut220702/rift1034c2_220702.xml (line 131) file: 'collection*'.xml --> For the document collection, in the Identification_Area , instead of saying "The document_loc collection", say "This collection" or "This document collection ". Using the directory name or collection part of the LID should not be used. --> Please rename the s. Please remove commas and "Telescopic Observations", and consider including the instrument and target. --> --> Note that the overview document title gives a <title> that is more concise. It might be a good to incorporate into the collection title. Also so as to not confuse people with very different titles, where one could infer the overview is for a different collection based on the title. --> --> If the derived data is only photometry, I would suggest adding that to the <title> --> Please add an internal reference to the overview document. --> For the raw IMACS collection, the target Didymos or Didymos system are not mentioned in the <description> of this collection. Shouldn't that be mentioned, especially if the calibrated and derived data collections do? --> Consider making the collection.xml internal reference to the overview document a LIDVID reference instead of LID reference. This is due to newer versions of an overview document being pointed to by an older version of the collection when the newer version overview document may not correctly apply to it. Data ==== IMACS --> Image is flipped diagonally when displayed as described in the label. Also, need clock angle to show orientation --> fits files: would it be easy to add the NorthClockAngle without giving RA & Dec? --> Would be nice to identify which frames are calibration frames. --> photometry: which filter was used? Mention in the description and the overview file --> photometry: Are aperture sizes recorded anywhere? SWOPE --> Raw image quadrants don't match sky orientation. line_display_direction and sample_display_direction need to be corrected for each quadrant image? Or each extension needs properly flipped/rotated. --> missing calibrated files: Two raw frames are not in calibrated data. ccd1142_a1_220822 (looks like focus mode?), ccd1294_a1_221005 (not obvious why not included). Add the frames or document that why are not included. --> raw fits files: they have extra black lines and columns when viewed in the PDS Viewer. The xml label says 2184x2176 which is compatible with NAXIS1 and NAXIS2 in the fits header. Looking in the table view, the values seem similar with the ones at locations < 2056, so they should not be black. However, when displayed in ds9 it shows 2056x2056. When looking at it in HEX, there seems to be padding with 0s at the end. --> photometry: which filter was used? Mention in the description and the overview file --> photometry: Are aperture sizes recorded anywhere? files: 'data_*_ddp/ut*/photometry*.{tab,xml}' --> Suggest renaming field 4 from "flag" to "discrepant flag" (or something similar) for the purpose of giving a clue to the user what they are looking at without reading the description. --> Note that the description for the magnitude field specifically states that the value is the "Calibrated magnitude estimate of Didymos" even though I thought many of these measurements were really in the change of the Didymos system especially since the change was due to the impact of Dimorphos, not Didymos. The File <comment> makes a similar assertion as the field description. In support of this change, the overview document for the collection does correctly say it is for the Didymos system. --> The SBN strongly encourages the use of the <field_format> keyword for all fields in a table. Please add these. --> Filenames are used to link individual data rows to the source data, but in PDS4 filenames are not fixed nor relevant and may change. A better field would be to use the LIDVID. EN Review ========= urn:nasa:pds:dart_teleobs:data_lcoswopeddp::1.0 *.xml - Two lid_references are slightly off. urn:nasa:pds:context:telescope:las_campanas.swope_1m urn:nasa:pds:context:instrument:las_campanas.swope_1m.4k_ccd should be urn:nasa:pds:context:telescope:las_campanas.swope_1m0 urn:nasa:pds:context:instrument:las_campanas.swope_1m0.4k_ccd The latter needs to be created. Please work with EN to create the instrument context product. collection_data_lcoswopeddp_overview.txt collection_data_lcoswopeddp_overview.xml - These files must be renamed, as "collection" is reserved. Suggestion: also remove "collection" from its LID.