Correcting the Subject--my visiting collaborator was demanding access to
my computer before I was ready...
> On Tue, 14 Mar 2006, Malcolm J. Currie wrote:
>
> > There is an imminent vote on the HEALPix WCS Convention by the European
> > FITS Committee. Does anyone here have any objection to this convention
> > being augmented to the official FITS standard?
> >
> > The proposition being voted upon is
> >
> > Should the proposed conventions for representing the HEALPix
> > projection in FITS files, given in Section 6 of the paper
> > "Mapping on the HEALPix grid" by Mark Calabretta and Boud Roukema,
> > be approved as an extension of the FITS World Coordinate System
> > (WCS) standard?
> >
> > Please forward to anyone in your respective UK-funded community that may
> > be impacted by this proposal or likely has an opinion. I'd like to hear
> > pros (e.g. "yes it's absolutely vital for...") and cons. Any comments
> > should be sent no later Friday morning.
> >
> > David B: does AST support the convention?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Malcolm
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Call for Regional FITS Committee Vote on the HEALPix WCS Convention
> >
> > FITS WCS Paper II was written with the intention that new spherical
> > projection types might be added in future. The HEALPix projection,
> > described in detail in "Mapping on the HEALPix grid" by
> > Mark Calabretta and Boud Roukema, is such a projection (see
> > http://www.atnf.csiro.au/~mcalabre).
> >
> > Section 6 of the paper presents the HEALPix projection, 'HPX' in FITS,
> > in the same terms as those in WCS Paper II. HPX was announced on
> > FITSBITS and FITSWCS and implemented in WCSLIB in early 2005 with the
> > formal 30-day comment period commencing in November.
|