> If you specified STC instead then you wouldn't need an additional
> dependency for NDF since it already depends on AST.
Sure if you mean STC-S, the text version of STC for human readers. The
2009 ADASS poster is opposite my office door. I was talking
historically to indicate that we have been thinking about irregular NDF
regions for many years, and there were reasons that it never was
implemented. Whereas STC has only been in AST three years.
> Alternatively you just put an ArdChan into AST (as we've already
> suggested many times) and simplify the ARD library significantly so
> that it just uses a thin layer around AST.
STC-S might be better long term, being an IVOA Standard, although an
ARDChan would let existing ARD files be used. Otherwise you might want
an ARD2STCS conversion task for easy migration.
We still need a syntax.
Malcolm
----
Starlink User Support list
For list configuration, including subscribing to and unsubscribing from the list, see
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=STARLINK
|