Clarify and correct Units section for VOUnits #51
Conversation
Although section 4.4 referenced VOUnits as the unit syntax, the summary and examples in the text did not actually conform to VOUnits syntax. I have corrected the text and examples, and clarified the text to say that unit attributes SHOULD conform to VOUnits. The use of SHOULD rather than MUST here reflects the consensus of the discussion on the apps mailing list at http://mail.ivoa.net/pipermail/apps/2023-May/001576.html I have *not* updated the examples in the "Possible VOTable extensions" Appendix A, which contains all manner of abominations alongside non-VOUnits compliant unit attributes.
VOTable.tex
Outdated
| division by the symbol ``{\tt/}'' | ||
| and exponentiation by the symbol ``{\tt**}''. | ||
| Examples are \attrval{unit}{m**2} for m$^2$, | ||
| \attrval{unit}{cm**-2.s**-1.keV**-1} for cm$^{-2}$s$^{-1}$keV$^{-1}$, | ||
| or \attrval{unit}{erg/s} for erg\,s$^{-1}$. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I know this erg/s value didn't change with this PR, but I notice that erg is considered deprecated according to VOUnit 1.0 with the same language in the proposed VOUnit 1.1.
Should we take this opportunity to change the example to not use erg? Something like:
| or \attrval{unit}{erg/s} for erg\,s$^{-1}$. | |
| or \attrval{unit}{10**-7.J/s} for erg\,s$^{-1}$ | |
| (uses \literalvalue{10**-7.J} in place of the deprecated \literalvalue{erg}). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good point, though given that the text here is only intended to be a very brief introduction to the syntax it might be better to sidestep the status of erg by just using something like m/s instead or omit the final example altogether.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I like the idea of simplifying or removing the last example to avoid erg. Its presence was not very important for this section.
|
I don't want to slow down the progress of an otherwise ready-to-go VOTable 1.5, so if this item turns out to be controversial or the editor otherwise deems it preferable, it can be left until the next VOTable update. |
I'll wait a day for comments, then approve/merge if nothing messy comes up. |
As agreed following comment by Tom.
Although section 4.4 referenced VOUnits as the unit syntax, the summary and examples in the text did not actually conform to VOUnits syntax.
I have corrected the text and examples, and clarified the text to say that unit attributes SHOULD conform to VOUnits. The use of SHOULD rather than MUST here reflects the consensus of the discussion on the apps mailing list at
http://mail.ivoa.net/pipermail/apps/2023-May/001576.html
I have not updated the examples in the "Possible VOTable extensions" Appendix A, which contains all manner of abominations alongside non-VOUnits compliant unit attributes.