2158 RID DDo : No need for DET.DITn as DET.DIT sufficient

[astronomyk]

See MET-2216, MET-2158

[hugobuddel]

https://jira.eso.org/browse/MET-2158

https://jira.eso.org/browse/MET-2216

[JenniferKarr]

I've updated the FITS keyword appendix to match the content of the recipes (ie DET.DIT, DET.ID, DET.NDIT); the DETn keywords may be in the raw data, for consistency with templates, and may be propogated, but won't be needed by the pipeline recipes.

I think this works for the DRLD, as the FITS keyword appendix contains keywords that are mentioned in the document.

[hugobuddel]

Great!

I took the liberty to remove this lone n in the header of DET.ID in 8ee02bf:

\subsubsection{DET\textit{n}.ID}\label{fits:det.id}

I think indeed including only the n-less keywords is fine for the DRLD, as long as it is clear how these headers are created. But their creation should be described in E-LIS-KUL-MET-1002 (METIS Data Interface Definition), or maybe in the ICS documents, not in the DRLD.

On the telecon I said that DET.DIT would be a copy of the relevant DETi.DIT as provided by the template. But I'm not sure that is actually true. Because ESO makes a distinction between the DIT as given by the user, and the DIT that was actually used by the instrument. So maybe DETi.DIT would be what the user asked for, and DET.DIT would be what actually happened.

Not sure whether it can really happen that DET.DIT could ever be different from the corresponding DETi.DIT, but that is the point: it doesn't matter for the pipeline. So I think you are right and that we should not mention the DETi.DIT keywords.

[hugobuddel]

I've answered the AI with

We resolved the issue by removing all references to DETn from the DRLD.

Attached is the page from the appendix where the header keywords are defined. The DETn keywords were not used elsewhere in the document.

It might be that it is still useful to (also) have the DETn keywords from the templates in the FITS headers; if so, then this is not relevant for the DRS, and thus out of scope for the DRLD.

And attached METIS_DRLD.5335cf.page469.pdf.

This is mainly an exercise to do all the required actions to close a RIX at least once.

The 5335cf in the file name and in the header of the document refers to the specific commit that was used to compile the document: https://github.com/AstarVienna/METIS_DRLD/tree/5335cf4b5c1698e8948ccfa1d9f47b979161babf

This commit hash is automatically added by compiling the document through make from a local clone instead of from overleaf.

I'm not sure whether we should close this issue here on github, because all our work should be done, or whether we should keep it open until the AI is closed by ESO.

I propose closing the github issue, and subsequently track on Jira whether ESO closes it, and then reopen the github issue if they disagree about our fix.