Tarek Hassan

Agree. I would propose changing quickly the current order of EDISP_2D, and solve #102 in the future.

> In principle it's a straightforward addition, we have the same situation for background: What about the science tools? It shouldn't be too problematic either, right? > Feel free to...

> DETX and DETY are in reconstructed coordinates, while effective area should be a function of true incident angle. Are you proposing to have a coordinate system for true coordinates...

> I think that this is even a consistent way to store the data: put the response matrix first, then put parameters as outer dimension. This can only be consistent...

I believe that what @kosack suggests makes sense. Using square bins in DETX and DETY can be approximately correct, but similar bins in (R,phi) would probably make more sense, and...

> Yes. That's how it works at the moment. That may be the best solution for now. > @TarekHC - You've thought about this a lot and prototyped in flexIRF....

Hi all, I think there should be a natural way of adding this kind of "lower level" variables. Also, EVT3 should contain events surviving a set of cuts, which could...

Hi all, I think it would indeed make sense to add an optional `gammaness` column to the event lists, and I fully support it. Although we encounter again with the...

I would say the most basic parameters would be `MC_DETX`, `MC_DETY` and `MC_ENERGY`, given that the main rationale to generate DL3 MC files will probably be effects over the FoV.

Sorry, but I don't understand: - Why would you store the gammaness of each event, if all you want is to store a gammaness cut? The only reasonable reason to...