Closed peter-michalski closed 4 years ago
@peter-michalski, this is a great test of the documentation. If someone cannot implement the IMs, at least "abstractly", then the document isn't done. @sorainsm, I haven't finished my review of your document, but I can see what @peter-michalski is getting at. Your Output field lists the output variables, but it doesn't say anything about how they are calculated. It looks like information is missing.
@sorainsm I also agree with the point doctor smith and peter points. It looks confusing without the equation/relationship between input and output in your IM. Moreover, it a bit hard to tell how does the data definition drive the Instance Model. I will post an issue about this question.
Equations added to IMs in cb95e52e54dcfd0b1df559731131bd8280acd53e. Also revised their structure to make the input and output types explicit.
@peter-michalski can you take a look at this new structure and let me know if it's more clear how the IMs would be implemented?
@smiths can you take a look at the structures and let me know if it's too close to code?
Closing issue as the IMs have been resolved and I'm unlikely to get feedback at this point.
I am wondering if there should be equations for the IMs (derived from GD1). How does the programmer transform the inputs into the outputs listed in the IMs? I am not familiar with optics myself, if I had to program this I would not be sure how to proceed (even from an abstract viewpoint; that is, not considering the data structures or algorithms that will come during design).
I would like to get @smiths input on this as well in case I am wrong here - hoping to expand my understanding.