> I take it that that the "web enabling" of Starlink apps is covered as part

The E-SO bid doesn't make the point that ORAC-DR can already and cdoes
access web-based information, such as catalogues.  Thus one aspect of
e-science can be addressed before the Starlink applications are `web
enabled'.

>  - You have missed IRIS-2 from the list of ORAC-DR support instruments.

Yes, and UIST is more than the IFU.  There is also a proof-of-concept
NIRI (Gemini) implementation akin to the GMOS one.

>  - You probably should point out that this work is complementary to the
> ESO pipelines since ESO are not supporting user pipelines, just pipelines
> to monitor data quality.

I thought it was, but it doesn't harm to repat the point phrased in a
different fashion to drum it home.

The extent that the ESO packages go beyond the basic data quality is
highly variable according to Derek.  From the e-science aspect they
ain't gonna fly.

On the Dalton point, we could say that in the consultation period that
we are mindful not to duplicate "grid-enabled" packages being written
for specific instruments.  I don't think that they're so complex that we
can't manage.  ORAC-DIR may not be as efficient in cpu cycles because it
may take a few steps of atomic applications rather than invoking a
bespoke task to perform the algorithm in one go, but we can save
programming time.  The modular nature also makes it more amenable to
modification by astronomers. ORAC-DR does work on a variety of
instruments, some of which have multiple modes, and we've coped already.
We've adapted existing recipes to new instruments.  These facts
demonstrate that we can develop ORAC-DR for complex instruments, if
we need to.

>  - including letters of support from UK users of ESO data would be helpful
> I think but you might be running out of time.

I did go through the couple of years UKIRT observer reports to find
quotable comments about ORAC-DR.  If it's right ethically, as these
confidential to JAC, we can mail these people asking for permission to
quote them.  What do you reckon Tim?

I have already suggested asking Mark Birkinshaw, Chairman of the AAO
Board, given the favourable comments re. ORAC-DR introduction at the
AAT.  John Davies can give a comparison of ORAC-DR versus his experience
at the VLT.

> One of the key benefits is
> making life easy for UK users so that they can make the most out of our
> ESO subscription. I think the benefits paragraph should be fleshed out
> some more. Something about large demand from users, no support from ESO
> etc etc.

One of the main thrusts of the PPARC plan is to maximise the benefits of
participation in ESO and Gemini.  So yes we should push this for all its
worth.  Astronomers concentrating on science not software... etc.

Our work may also benefit future instrument builders, who don't have to
start from scratch, posibly leading to a saving in ESO's development
budget.  (I don't know how new instruments are funded in ESO.)

>  - Have ESO expressed an interest in your ISAAC pipeline? Is it to be
> publicised in the ESO newsletter?

Not directly, but Derek told me that some people at ESO were impressed.
I already decided we should have a piece in the "ESO Messenger" once the
pipeline has been beta-tested.  Besides showing how wonderful ORAC-DR
is, it can address some of the problems, which, for example, may lead to
improvements to the headers as Tim suggests.

I'm also going to ask for a link on the ISAAC reduction page.  The
question of where isn't clear yet but it should have some overview,
links to the Software Store to obtain ORAC-DR and to the various SUNs.
BTW Tim the ORAC-DR home page is a little out of date.

>  - The one staff year sounds like the work required simply to generate a
> wide range of recipes for ESO data. Actual supporting the Starlink
> applications will be difficult for that person. Where is the money coming
> from for that?

Personally, I don't think one SY/y on the wide range of recipes is
sufficient in the first year.  To make an impact on more than one
multi-mode instrument instrument, even just considering what's already
in the ESO Archive, let alone the new instruments coming.  We must have
the main few instruments supported quickly to become the standard for UK
reduction of ESO data.  Speaking personally, while it's fine for my
Annual Report being a vital cog in the machinery, it's important to
spread the expertise in ORAC-DR amongst the Starlink team.  This can
also lead to further ideas and improvements for ORAC-DR.

The work plan should mention that we wish to improve the documentation
for astronomers to adapt the recipes.  This includes the Programmer
Manual.  Is xoracdr documented outside of itself?

>  - Are ESO amenable to tweaking their FITS headers (eg by putting in a DR
> recipe or the dispersion) to make life easier for the pipeline?

My contacts so far would suggest otherwise.  I've made a number of
suggestions, and I get no feedback.  No even a "thank you for your
comments, and we'll consider your suggestions".  I've not been impressed
by the dialogue.  It's small numbers and some people are bewtter than
others responding to e-mails and taking on board ideas from outside.
I think personal contact will help a great deal.  Once we're seen as
serious players that can benefit ESO users and hence making the
telescopes more efficient, our input ought to be incorporated into
ESO development.

Re. the laptop.  It's also needed to demonstrate the software and garner
user feedback to improve or extend the recipes, and develop ideas for
new recipes and algoritms.

Didn't understand "to plug additional applications" in 4.2.2.

I do have some ideas floating about for ways to improve user
customisation of ORAC-DR.

Malcolm