Redundancy and naming of flux values
There are several similar entries with the flux in hdf5_cfg.xml:
In the group FLUO:
<i0 NAPItype="NX_FLOAT" ESRF_description="Incident intensity" units="">${FLUO_i0}</i0>
<it NAPItype="NX_FLOAT" ESRF_description="Transmitted intensity" units="">${FLUO_it}</it>
<group NX_class="NXcollection" groupName="measurement">
<current_start record="initial" ESRF_description="Machine current" NAPItype="NX_FLOAT64" units="mA">${InstrumentSource_current_start}</current_start>
<current_end record="final" ESRF_description="Machine current" NAPItype="NX_FLOAT64" units="mA">${InstrumentSource_current_end}</current_end>
<i0 record="initial" ESRF_description="Incident flux" NAPItype="NX_FLOAT64" units="photons/s">${TOMO_i0_start}</i0>
<it record="initial" ESRF_description="Transmitted flux" NAPItype="NX_FLOAT64" units="photons/s">${TOMO_it_start}</it>
<i0 ESRF_description="Incident flux" NAPItype="NX_FLOAT64" record="final" units="photons/s">${TOMO_i0_end}</i0>
<it ESRF_description="Transmitted flux" NAPItype="NX_FLOAT64" record="final" units="photons/s">${TOMO_it_end}</it>
</group>
In the group TOMO:
<i0 NAPItype="NX_FLOAT" ESRF_description="Incident intensity" units="">${TOMO_i0}</i0>
<it NAPItype="NX_FLOAT" ESRF_description="Transmitted intensity" units="">${TOMO_it}</it>
-
They are really FLUO related and could/should be called FLUO_i0_start, FLUO_i0_end, etc.
-
Do we want both i0 (aka FLUO_i0) and i0 (aka TOMO_i0_start&end) in the measurement group? Or the choice is up to the user?
-
Another point: this merge request: !32 (merged) is not yet included in the current hdf5_cfg.xml file, right?