The current NXentry has the field entry_identifier which is defined as a "unique identifier for the measurement, defined by the facility."
Facilities that are using the Bluesky data acquisition have both a unique identifier (which is a uuid) and a 'transient identifier' which is along the lines of a traditional scan/run identifier.
As more facilities are adopting Bluesky, it would be nice to come to a recommendation on how to store both the uuid and scan id before we all develop our own standards. At the moment, I can see an argument for storing either the 'scan id' or the 'uuid' in the entry_identifier - but then where to store the other one.
Either adding an optional field like entry_uuid or unique_entry_identifier or allowing the adding a uuid attribute ?
The current
NXentryhas the fieldentry_identifierwhich is defined as a "unique identifier for the measurement, defined by the facility."Facilities that are using the Bluesky data acquisition have both a unique identifier (which is a uuid) and a 'transient identifier' which is along the lines of a traditional scan/run identifier.
As more facilities are adopting Bluesky, it would be nice to come to a recommendation on how to store both the
uuidand scan id before we all develop our own standards. At the moment, I can see an argument for storing either the 'scan id' or the 'uuid' in theentry_identifier- but then where to store the other one.Either adding an optional field like
entry_uuidorunique_entry_identifieror allowing the adding auuidattribute ?