Re: FITS header values

[Tom Droege <tdroege@veriomail.com>]

The Plan

I have a terrible bias toward those that give me specific instructions as 
to what to do.  When done in public, there seems little chance that I will 
be led astray in my trust.  This forum has a nice effect on those that say 
"fooey" or do not think things out.  They seem to get quickly stomped 
on.  Michael has done his penance and has presented what appears to be a 
nice plan to me.  Jure and Michael have told me what to do.  It is my 
intent to just copy the items given by them.  I also agree with Arne's 
request to bunch like things together.  I will shortly put up the new 
version of the header.

Tom Droege


At 01:13 PM 4/10/01 -0400, you wrote:

>   Arne pointed out that we really should adhere to the new
>FITS header conventions, rather than say "fooey."  I can't
>justify any other course of action, in all seriousness.
>Okay, what does that mean?
>
>   The new FITS WCS conventions are described in a set of 3
>papers by Calabretta and Griesen.  The one most relevant to
>our purposes is (yet to be?) published in Astronomy and Astrophysics.
>One can find a preprint at