TC Meeting : Sep 8

[Daniel Haley]

Hi All,

The next TC meeting is scheduled for 8pm UTC, Tue September 8,

Madison Tue 14:00 *
London : Tue 20:00 *
Berlin: Tue 21:00 *
Sydney : Wed 05:00

I'll send around a more detailed agenda shortly.


Regarding Andy's comments, I believe there are still some outstanding
comments from Dieter (appended below). Some on-list discussion might
help to address concerns directly.

As a reminder, you should have the editable version of the standard
yourself, but the non-editable version is here:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vRxcJ_xF_jiNS77CoeZdQdDXD8l2BebL-DoOBkDrAsGTrkArdjLHEMCXAifBieeS8pTO9jJ9xnstKxs/pub

Thanks,

Dan

Dieter's Comments:
===
(1) there should be an introduction that explains what this is for (what
are the benefits, who should use this?). Very few people in the
community might be able to guess a broader purpose (beyond the stated
“utilise existing file storage technologies … [for] high performance
primitives").
(2) there should be a brief explanation of what HDF5 is, and why it is
chosen for the proposed standard (benefits?) - I would not assume this
is broadly established in the broader APT community.
(3) how are we dealing with parameters that are not easy to come by,
e.g., how do I know the "Virtual imaging distance” for my instrument?
Laser spot size, beyond the nominal value given for a specific
instrument type by hearsay? Is there an established procedure how to
measure that, e.g. FWHM of a laser scan?
(4) there seem still to be missing some basic experimental parameters,
e.g. the base vacuum of the instrument or perhaps vacuum evolution
during the experiment. Specimen preparation details? Perhaps the intent
is to have Specimen Prep included with “SampleDescription”, at 5MB there
is plenty of room, compared to the max 100 or 200 characters limit for
other specimen descriptors, but this is not explicitly asked for. These
may be minor points, but I think the standard should be reasonably
complete and detail-balanced before presenting it to the community for
comment.
(5) In terms of extensibility of the format, should “Additional fields
are strongly discouraged” really be the only thing we have to say? Are
there any plans how to deal with potential revisions or extensions,
beyond including a HDF5 version number?
===

[Anna Ceguerra]

Hi Dan,

Could I please request one hour later? The Doodle Poll shows we're all available at that time.

Regards,
Anna.

On 31/8/20, 8:27 am, "atompr...@googlegroups.com on behalf of Daniel Haley" <atompr...@googlegroups.com on behalf of daniel...@materials.ox.ac.uk> wrote:

Hi All,

The next TC meeting is scheduled for 8pm UTC, Tue September 8,

Madison Tue 14:00 *
London : Tue 20:00 *
Berlin: Tue 21:00 *
Sydney : Wed 05:00

I'll send around a more detailed agenda shortly.


Regarding Andy's comments, I believe there are still some outstanding
comments from Dieter (appended below). Some on-list discussion might
help to address concerns directly.

As a reminder, you should have the editable version of the standard
yourself, but the non-editable version is here:

https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/fN5fCVARKgCZmyDNiGoijC?domain=docs.google.com

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "AtomProbe TC" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to atomprobe-tc...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/KlsiCWLVXkU4ZqARcxQMhI?domain=groups.google.com.

[Daniel Haley]

I should stop sending emails at night - the timezones specified were an
hour out. 8PM UTC corresponds really to:
> Madison Tue 15:00 *
> London : Tue 21:00 *
> Berlin: Tue 22:00 *
> Sydney : Wed 06:00


The meeting is at 8pm UTC.