Telco 20250707

Date

Monday, 7th Jul, 15:00 UTC

Connect

Agenda

  • PRs

    • EM - 1423 volunteers for reviewing: AB, HB

    • Computational Geometry - 1421, 1532

    • NeXus Papers

Present

SB, AB, HB, PC, BW, RB, FS, RO, ZM, BB - MarkusK, LukasP (FAIRmat)

Minutes

  • PRs on APM, NXprocess has passed

  • NeXus Paper

    • SB: initial draft is ready for further contributions

    • AB: co-author possibilities: (a) NIAC 2024 Meeting participants, and those who contribute additionally (b) all NIAC members

    • MK: contribution section could clarify the individual contributions

    • AB: volunteers to review the manuscript and share with NIAC

  • Computational Geometry PRs - 1421, 1532

    • MK: changes are in 2 categories: (a) moving (and renaming) CG base classes from contributed to base_classes; (b) bookiping changes (main in contributed defintiions which were using these base classes before)

    • AB: changes in contributed are not needed to be voted by NIAC

    • MK: we take advantage of base class inheritance. NXcg_primitive is the main super_class for NXcg_* classes. Note that multiple level of complexity is supported: cg expert mode, but also simple geometry descriptions. Spline representations, are left intentionally out at this stage. GLTF format is widely used and is ready for performant use. We do not compete

    • BW: How the shapes are anchored (e.g. to origin)

    • MK: vertices are given using NXcg_primitive/position. Cylinders (with no vertices can also be described by defining its axis)

    • BW: specific examples could be useful to enhance documentation

    • MK: agreed

    • BW: how to combine multiple objects, like a box with a hole in it?

    • MK: PR 1532 supports that

    • AB: Do we support separate documentation pages for groups of base classes

    • LP: Yes, PR 1428 does it, but it assumes also NXem is accepted

    • AB: We could go ahead with this reorganisation, and put examples (maybe only a single, but representative example, e.g. a cylinder) into this structure

    • MK: Regrouping of old base classes could also be performed (e.g. beamline components, etc.)

    • RO: next to base classes and application definitions, maybe we need another ‘category’ as a new organisational hierarchy layer.

    • SB: do we need new category (or categories) to define, or a subdirectory structure in base_classes and/or application_definitions would be enough?

    • AB: PRs for such reorganisation are all welcome

    • LP: Taking advantage of new tags could be used to automate the split generation of documentation

    • MK: such new tag could be called, like ‘domain’ which could be used for this

    • AB: +1

    • SB: domain could be a list of domains

    • AB: let us wait for a PR which implements it

    • AB: Is PR 1421 ready for a vote? All reorganization and documentation enhancements shall come in a separate PR.

    • BW: could go to a vote, but its content will need extensions/additions in the future

    • AB: PR 1532. Only documentation changes, which will not need extra vote

    • MK: yes, to support extended use

    • SB: why not to merge the 2 PRs and vote together

    • BW: +1

    • AB: or just vote for 1421, and then automatically merge 1532, too.

    • PC: what to do with old standard? delete, or deprecate?

    • MK: we may keep the old standard for now alive without deprecating them

    • PC: mantid probably use off_geometry, but old contributed definitions could be deleted

    • AB: why not keep in PR 1532 only documentation changes, and keep other classes as contributed. New vote can bring those into the standard.

  • EM - 1423 volunteers for reviewing: AB, HB

    • AB: All requests are implemented, final review is needed. P Ercius could contribute for this.

    • FS: can ask Jordi Arbiol for also checking it

    • MK: also example files are prepared and can be checked

    • RO: Can we consistent with prefices or suffices (NXapm_…, but NXlens_em)?

    • LP: NXoptical_window and NXlens_em are already accepted, but the name can be changed (in a separate PR)

    • MK: NXem should be voted by MC Conference, so it can be presented to Tech partners as the standard

    • AB: shall we move NXem to vote?

    • HB: please do

    • all accepted

    • AB: give a chance to finalise the tech review before Friday, and do the vote after that deadline.

  • PR 1576 broken links in new webpage

    • ZM: easy fix is done

    • AB: thanks, can be merged

    • MK: are xsd links are also broken? A specific validation is CI/CD does not pick it up, but could be checked.