From: "Dorothy A. Fraquelli" <fraquelli@stsci.edu>
To: "Gerard Kriss" <gak@stsci.edu>, <bushouse@stsci.edu>, <dickinson@stsci.edu>, <donahue@stsci.edu>, <gaffney@stsci.edu>, <keyes@stsci.edu>, <koekemoe@stsci.edu>, <mauro@stsci.edu>, <meurer@pha.jhu.edu>, <padovani@stsci.edu>, <sparks@stsci.edu>, <swade@stsci.edu>
Subject: Draft Quality Info Enhancement
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 08:45:03 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
Importance: Normal



Enhance Quality Notations for Archived Data Sets
================================================

Description:

Data that are obviously unsuitable for use in any scientific
investigation or that may require special processing should
be flagged as bad, that is, called to the user's attention,
early in the observation request process.

Examples of unsuitable data include, but are not limited to,
the following.

      + NIC data taken within <t seconds of SAA exit
      + external observations taken with the instrument shutter
        closed or the high voltage off
      + guiding failures, especially for instruments without a shutter
      + exposures contaminated by scattered Earth light
      + data that can not yet be correctly processed

The flag should be clearly visible on the appropriate Starview
page.

The flag should use the existing quality information contained
in the archive catalog.  Simple comparisons of other, existing,
archive catalog keywords may also be used to form a quality
indicator.

Science Case:

Users should be warned, before retrieval, regarding data that are
not suitable for scientific use or that may require special processing.

Unique STScI capabilities:

STScI has a priori knowledge of the quality of much of the HST data
through the keywords in the archive catalog.  STScI has additional
knowledge of datasets that currently do not process correctly, but
which may be processable at a later time.  When a user requests
information on such datasets, the quality information should be
displayed for that user.

Assumptions

  The results of the PROMPT working Group need to be known before any
  implementation may proceed.

Required Decisions


Min and Max Goals

      Minimum Goal: Provide stored quality information to the user.  By
      default the quality information will be provided.  The user will not
      need to request it.


      Maximum Goal: Provide stored quality information, with interpretation,
                    to the user.


Implementation Plan

   Quality information already resides in the archive.  Software to read and
   present this information to the user already exists.  For the minimum
goal,
   it should be a simple matter to change the display to quality information
   from optional to required.  This MAY require a change in one or more of
the
   Starview screens, which would increase the resources needed to accomplish
   the goal.

   To accomplish the maximum goal, rules on how to interpret the quality
   information need to be defined.  Some interpretations will require the
   software to access more than just the existing Quality information.



Required Resources

	- For Min Goals

        A developer experienced with DADS and Starview.
        A tester.


	- For Max Goals

        Personnel with experience in combining scinece and engineering
        keywords in order to place a quality estimate on science data.
        These people will define the interpretation rules.

        A developer to write the code.

        A tester to test the code.

        Possibly a user, early in the process, to help define the best to
        present the information to the users.

Time Scales (for min and max goals)

	- For Min Goals:  two months


	- For Max Goals: one to two years