Spectra DM for theoretical spectra?
gerard.lemson at mpe.mpg.de
Wed Jun 3 06:10:58 PDT 2009
> I think it's perfectly explained (thank you).
> So we are talking about provenance. All right.
> Thus, I will study the work that is being doing about the
> provenance data model. So far, knowing that "this is a
> question about provenance" doesn't help me to tackle the
> problem of how knowing if what is called Teff for one model
> is the same "thing" than what is called "T" fo other model.
> (and for me this problem is almost exactly the same one as
> knowing if two observed spectra correspond to the same "point" in sky)
PLEASE also look into the SimDB data model.
It already allows you to describe the provenance/history of
synthetic/simulation data products.
Why is that not good for you?
> The summary would be:
> - This is not part of the spectrumDM.
> - The provenance DM (where it seems to belong conceptually)
> does not consider these kind of information right now and it
> is difficult because, in real life, each model will use
> different parameters.
> - It is not either the purpose of SimDB going to such detail
> level (although it could be extended, but should be discussed
> if it's worth to do so)
> But, at the same time, we are told that the case of
> theoretical spectra is already considered in SSAP
> (+SpectrumDM + ObsDM) and that we shouldn't discuss much about it...
This is the old story indeed. But this is what we are now discussing,
whether that answer is still correct.
So don't give up yet!
More information about the dm