RE: file naming

["Creager, Robert S" <CreagRS@LOUISVILLE.STORTEK.COM>]

To support the uniqueness, it seems we need to add the site identifier back
into the name IF we want the name on it's own to be unique.  We could change
the sequence to be a 2 digit hex number.  This allows for 256 exposures on a
given night, and is relatively easy to encode/decode (vs. base 26/36, if we
don't need the extra numbers).  Is that enough given the physical
capabilities of the hardware and it's interface?

sjjjjfxx.fit

>    where
>      jjjj = last 4 day digits of the Julian Date
>      f    = filter name (bvri)  d for dark, s (short 
> exposure) for bias.
>      xx   = sequence number starting at 00 going to FF

	 s    = site char designation

Then you wouldn't need separate directories to have the uniqueness.

Honest, the horse got back up again,
Rob

> -----Original Message-----
> From: aah@nofs.navy.mil [mailto:aah@nofs.navy.mil]
> Sent: Friday, June 15, 2001 12:54 PM
> To: tass@listserv.wwa.com
> Subject: RE: file naming
> 
> 
> I have not given up on file naming conventions; I am just
> listening for a couple of days to opinions.  I presented
> a couple of ideas, but others might have better ones.
> I think the constraints are:
>   (1) 8x3 format to be strictly ISO 9660 standard
>   (2) as much uniqueness as possible
>   (3) some human-friendly name to make sense and help
>       in sorting/processing files
>       
> probably there should be a 4th constraint:  the x3 extension
> needs to be .fit to make it easier for various software programs
> to read the data directly from the CD.
>   This seems like such a trivial exercise, yet it will the
> basis for file names for years to come.  Everyone who has
> an opinion should voice it.
> Arne
>