[fitsbits] Proposed Changes to the FITS Standard

[Preben Grosbol]

On Thursday 16 August 2007 16:32, Peter Teuben wrote:
> So, random groups may
> be old, but it works and isn't broken.
Yes of course.  Rereading the FITS v3 proposal its wording
should be okay with respect to random groups as it is
actually a primary header.

My main concern is the wording of Sec. 3.7 which may open
the door for changes too wide.

Preben