[Aavso-photometry] FITS Keyword List

[Brian D. Warner]

Michael,

The one FITS standard has become a pretty well universally adopted convention.
Regardless of how well-adopted that convention is, that does not equate to
a formal standard.

Any claims by any vendor should more carefully qualify what is meant about
compliance. If it follows a convention, that is what should be stated, not
that it's in compliance with _the one standard._

I'll go back to my original contention that if any image from any package can
pass the test on

  http://fits.gsfc.nasa.gov/fits_verify.html

(not NOFS, as I incorrectly stated, but NASA/GSFC FITS Support page), it should be
considered "compliant" for now and that the software is also "compliant." That is
a formal test that can be independently validated by anyone.

Arne proposed that he work with vendors to adopt some sort of rules. That's fine,
but unless something special happens, it looks to be just another convention,
maybe the "AAVSO FITS convention." That's fine, too, just as long as it's recognized
as such and not some formal standard against which software is claimed to comply and 
so
imply suitability or usefulness.

Unfortunately, without the making of a true standard, the issue of compliance will
never be resolved (that assumes people will honor that standard). Adding yet another
convention just means more work, headaches, and tech support issues for vendors and
end-users.


Clear Skies,
Brian D. Warner
Palmer Divide Observatory/Space Science Institute
http://www.MinorPlanetObserver.com

Collaborative Asteroid Lightcurve Link (CALL)
http://www.MinorPlanetObserver.com/astlc/default.htm