[NeXus-committee] Questionaire Reminder

Ray Osborn rosborn at anl.gov
Thu Sep 20 08:28:53 BST 2012


Hi Armando,

On Sep 20, 2012, at 8:24 AM, V. Armando Sole wrote:

> Here we disagree.
> 
> We do not know what the files of Diamond, Soleil or ALBA contain, but that does not prevent users of those facilities from using our HDF5 analysis codes.
> The beauty of HDF5 is that if an analysis program needs a certain parameter, and that parameter is in the file, the user can tell where to find it, save his choice for the future and (s)he is done. Definitions, dictionaries or however we want to call them, can be built "on the fly".
> 
> From the analysis point of view, the important thing is "what is needed for the analysis" not how or where and we do not think it corresponds to the NIAC to decide.


Actually, we may not disagree that much, although I'm not sure what the rest of the NIAC thinks. I support the idea of individual instruments being able to decide on their own what to put in the NeXus files, particularly if their instrument setup is unique. NIAC can't vet every instrumental configuration. However, I would prefer that they adopt the NeXus conventions, i.e., put sample information in the NXsample group, instrument logs in NXlog groups, and (especially) data in NXdata, so that others can navigate the file and know where to find things. If the name for something has been defined in the NeXus glossary, then I would prefer they use it, e.g., use 'temperature', not 'temp', etc. Other than that, I believe they should be free to do what they want. I would still be able to scan a file like that within, for example, my Python browser, and plot the data. 

A generic HDF5 file could be made self-describing, but it's not guaranteed. The NeXus guidelines just ensure that they will be.

With best regards,
Ray
-- 
Ray Osborn
Materials Science Division
Argonne National Laboratory
Argonne, IL 60439, USA
Phone: +1 (630) 252-9011
Email: ROsborn at anl.gov






More information about the NeXus-committee mailing list