Subject: WFC to vote two days from now

From: dwells (Don Wells)
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 93 18:48:58 EDT

Dear WGAS FITS Committee members,

I propose to hold the WFC vote on the three FITS proposals two days
from now (please don't send your votes until I call for them).  If
anyone objects to this schedule please tell me by Email.  If anyone
wants further time to discuss the proposals, or has an objection that
they are reluctant to discuss publicly, please tell me by Email *now*.

The WGAS BINTABLE vote will be on the basic BINTABLE document plus the
Pence-Tody appendix C. It is understood, of course, that Appendices A,
B and C "[are] optional and [do] not preclude other conventions [and
are] not part of the proposed binary tables definition." My view of
the three appendices is that (1) they are recommended practices which
will guide prototyping work during the next few years and (2) they are
a strong proof that the basic BINTABLE proposal is a proper foundation
for future evolution.

We will cast separate votes on the three proposals.  As is customary
in standards work, the voting will not be secret.  I append the list
of voting members. Report errors or changes to me.

I myself expect to vote YES on all three proposals.  I append some
text which I sent to one of you in December, a person who said that
they were new to FITS design deliberations and wanted some advice from
me about how to vote.

Regards,
Don

    -*- The 20 Voting Members of WFC -*-
    [email-masked]
    [email-masked]
    [email-masked]
    [email-masked]
    [email-masked]
    [email-masked]
    [email-masked]
    [email-masked]
    [email-masked]
    [email-masked]
    [email-masked]
    [email-masked]
    [email-masked]
    [email-masked]
    [email-masked]
    [email-masked]
    [email-masked]
    [email-masked]
    [email-masked]
    [email-masked]

    -*- Extracts from a 05Dec92 message to a WFC member -*-

Bob Hanisch asked you to serve in order that [your
observatory/project] and related astronomy groups would be
represented. People from other institutions were asked to serve for
the same reason. Bob and I have no illusions that you or others who
have not been involved in the earlier FITS design debates can [come]
fully up to speed in [a few months].  One purpose of forming the
committee and asking persons like yourself to serve on it was that, in
time, the committee work would effectively increase both the number
and the diversity of the people who would be knowledgeable and would
be capable of participating in the esoteric design debates...

Of the three proposals, the one that *really* matters is BINTABLE. I
hope that you approve of this proposal. In fact, I hope that you
*really* approve of it, so much so that you would use it for [your
observatory/project] in appropriate places. Most people familiar with
FITS regard BINTABLE as the most important proposal since the original
Basic FITS agreement. I myself expect that it will eventually become
the dominant data format in astronomical archives. As Doug Tody
remarked, the people who negotiated BINTABLE expect to layer a variety
of other agreements on top of it. If you study BINTABLE closely I
expect that you will perceive the sweeping generality of this format,
its power to do almost anything. The variable-length field scheme in
the appendix is probably going to be immensely important in the long
run.

To answer your question: canvas local opinion if that makes you
comfortable, or vote your own mind if that is what you want to do...

The blocking proposal is cut and dried, and probably not
controversial. Ditto for the IMAGE proposal. The real issue is
BINTABLE. If you object, please be brave enough to say so! If you are
unwilling to say it publicly, then say it to me privately, and we can
discuss it. I will respect your opinion, and probably will try to
change it, because I really do want [your observatory/project] to be
on board on major FITS decisions. This one is major.  If you think
BINTABLE is OK, but you don't want to use it (at least not at
present), then I recommend that you vote YES in order to demonstrate
moral support for the other astronomy communities that have stated
that this format is critical for their applications.
 --

Donald C. Wells             Associate Scientist        [email-masked]
National Radio Astronomy Observatory                   +1-804-296-0277
520 Edgemont Road                                 Fax= +1-804-296-0278
Charlottesville, Virginia 22903-2475 USA            78:31.1W, 38:02.2N