[NeXus-tech] Updated draft concordance

[yayahjb]

Dear Colleagues,

   After several fruitless tries of trying to get the essence of the 9 
May 2013
document down to the requested 2 pages, I have (temporarily) given up on
that possibility and instead have added a table of contents and the 
following
guidance on how to read the document:

While the mappings described here are complex and detailed, the 
approaches to the mappings
are simple. If you are familiar with both CBF and NeXus, you should read 
section 4
“Mapping from CBF to NeXus” on page 6 through “Identifying images” on 
page 13 and
section 5 “Mapping from NeXus to CBF/imgCIF” on page 41 through “Mapping 
Fields”
on page 42. If you are interested on the handling of the Dectris Eiger 
detector, see section 7
“Proposed Pixel Array Detector Application Definitions” on page 104

You will find the updated document at:

https://sites.google.com/site/nexuscbf/mapping-draft/Concordance_Summary_21May13.pdf 
<https://sites.google.com/site/nexuscbf/mapping-draft/Concordance_Summary_21May13.pdf>

Comments, corrections and suggestions appreciated.  Hopefully we are 
close to
a generally acceptable approach

Regards,
   Herbert

On 5/9/13 6:56 AM, yayahjb wrote:
> On the basis of yesterday's telco, I have updated the concordance 
> summary to
> reflect the agreement on prefixing all the new CBF-related items with 
> CBF_ and
> prefixing the new Dectris classes with DECTRIS_
>
> The full document is
>
> https://sites.google.com/site/nexuscbf/mapping-draft/Concordance_Summary_9May13.pdf 
>
>
> The Dectris portion is on pages 101-119 of that document.
>
> As per the request by Mark, I will try to make a short summary 
> document of the
> changes from currently adopted NeXus rules and conventions by next 
> week for
> further discussion, but with the prefixing the current proposal should be
> in reasonable conformance with the rules (if not all the conventions, 
> especially
> in the way that arbitrary axis names are used in this new structure), 
> and, with
> modest adjustments to NXvalidate to pay attention to the prefixes, should
> allow for validation of the new information.
>
> More next week.