head 1.1; access; symbols; locks http:1.1; strict; comment @# @; 1.1 date 2004.02.04.15.42.16; author PaoloPadovani; state Exp; branches; next ; desc @none @ 1.1 log @none @ text @SWG Discussion Notes, Feedback Session -------------------------------------- M. Allen, Jan 29, 2004; slightly revised by P. Padovani, Jan 30, 2004 Summary of the SWG discussion after the AVO demo. (Contributions are not verbatim, and have been paraphrased and summarised) R.Hanisch * Impressed with the wide range of VO data we are using in VO enabled tools * The AVO demo software is a rich environment, but not one that the community is familiar with. i.e. it requires learning something new * The interface for the filters capability is difficult to use. For example, the shortcuts to column names are not supported by also having the required braces automatically in the correct place, and in general the syntax is difficult. A.Lawrence * Responding to comments about the demo being too fast: speed was necessary for the presentation of the demo * Recognises the need for work-flow specification P.Quinn * On the subject of usability: there is a fuzzy boundary between what the data-centres/VO-developers/Astronomers are doing R.Hanisch * We need to pay attention to the interfaces because that is what the users see. P.Ortiz * There will always be learning curves for new tools. Recommends the use of "Quick Guides" and workflows P.Quinn * Capturing workflows N.Walton * Saving and creating workflows is important. * We could have a repository of standard workflows F.Genova * recommends online examples of using the tools P.Padovani * Detailed workflows for the AVO demo scenarios are available on the Wiki pages J.McDowell * Able to reproduce the demo using the online materials with a success of about 80% C.Motch * Data reduction "threads" have been very successful for X-ray data reduction. A.Richards * Scripting and repeatability are essential for science usage of the tools. Documentation is important for this. P.Osuna * The XMM/ISO archive teams are working-on/planning/considering the development a general tool for display of spectra * Supports the idea of data centres contributing VO tools N.Walton * Posed the question: Do you/we want more tools or more data? (for the next demo) P.Quinn * Elaborated on "the mission" * data availability is the job of the data centres * Euro-VO includes a vision for a Data Centre Alliance B.Leibundgut * how do I publish my data on the VO? A.Lawrence * It's not our (the VO?) job to do the data centres' work * It should be possible for anyone who wants to publish data on the VO; need for registries XMM and ISO data in the demo made it three times better than it would have been otherwise - this was something that XMM/ISO were motivated to do independently B.Leibundgut * How do we get wider use of the AVO tool? A.Richards * Recommends summer schools to gain community acceptance via young people, citing success of VLA summer schools; also, we need refereed papers in journals based on AVO tools P.Quinn * The AVO prototype is a demo, not production yet, and probably wouldn't be able to support too many users * The SWG is who the prototype was built for F.Genova * Agrees that a few papers in journals would help; but difficult to get citation and credit for use of tools F.Kerber * What we need is for the SWG to write 3-5 science papers this year using the demo software P.Quinn * There is a need for astronomy projects to see the VO as important (to have a VO mind-set) so that we can progress to a situation where VO is included in funding of astronomy (rather than from IT (?)) G.Fabbiano * Need robust and user friendly software and documentation in order to get community acceptance * The Chandra X-ray experience shows that (the software) really needs to be easy to use P.Quinn * The Euro-VO facility centre will be a central place for helping astronomers to use VO tools. It will be a repository of expertise A.Lawrence * Robustness and usability G.Fabbiano * Emphasizes the need for robustness R.Hanisch * Issue of reliability is important: it was not possible to run ACE (Sextractor service) on some images; there is no default configuration to be used; release should be done carefully, as otherwise people will get a bad impression [Later follow up showed this to be some x-ray images, and images that are stored in FITS files with extensions: M.A.] [Discussion on Sextractor; excerpts below] P.Rosati * SExtractor is a complex program with a big configuration file; results from a "standard" configuration file should be treated with caution P.Padovani * it's going to be hard to satisfy the needs of "specialised" users with VO tools P.Rosati * one could have a standard configuration file and then allow for more iterations to allow tweaking of the parameters F.Genova * Reminds the group that "it's a prototype" L.DaCosta * Very impressed with the demo, it shows great progress from the Jan 2003 demo. "Just show me how to use it" M.Allen * the interoperability basis of the demo software IS working * the demo is a demo of VO concepts, not a demo of robust software P.Ortiz * SExtractor default parameters... * Need links to component program (like SExtractor) details in order to get to the details needed for complex use R.Hanisch * Agrees with L.DaCosta on the success of the demo, and offers criticism as a way to help define the future directions. * The demo is a "big accomplishment" * We should not release non-robust software to the community M.Allen * Perhaps make prototypes available as a tool that lets you do things you can't do any other way, but that is not robust, i.e. use at own risk R.Hanisch * Need to specify the limitations of the software P.Padovani * VO tools should enable use of data from a field that one is not an expert in; no need for extremely accurate Sextractor magnitudes R.Hanisch * The science focus of the AVO demo approach is a "good thing" * Solicits SWG members to contribute science problems and carry out projects based on the new infrastructure -------------------------------------------------------------------- @