EUCLID: new method get_sia to access the Simple Image Access Protocol (SIAP) v2.0

[cosmoJFH]

Dear astroquery team,

we would like to implement a new method for the Simple Image Access Protocol (SIAP) v2.0 exposed by the Euclid project.

The Euclid Archive applies the following IVOA standard to serve:

1. Tables (catalogues), via the IVOA Table Access Protocol TAP
2. Spectra, via the IVOA DataLink prococol.
3. Images (and cutouts), via the Simple Image Access (SIA)

The new get_sia method will allow users to obtain the “file_name” and “file_path” of the FITS files that contain the observations of the input coordinates.

cc @esdc-esac-esa-int
jira: EUCLIDSWRQ-250

[keflavich]

This looks like a great addition.

Could you clarify - does the get_cutout function currently work with an older siap version? Or does it not work at all?

[keflavich]

Also the current test failures look like they're caused by incomplete monkeypatching of the remote queries; something is still reaching out to the internet - but I think that's what you're actively debugging as I type.

[cosmoJFH]

Could you clarify - does the get_cutout function currently work with an older siap version? Or does it not work at all?

The get_sia + get_cutout can be seen as analogous to the datalink service, where the get_links (get_sia) serves as the discovery component, and the get_data (get_cutout) acts as the downloading component.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 85.93750% with 9 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 73.08%. Comparing base (9347344) to head (49845eb).
⚠️ Report is 21 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
astroquery/esa/euclid/core.py	86.66%	8 Missing ⚠️
astroquery/utils/tap/core.py	75.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3506      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   73.04%   73.08%   +0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         219      219              
  Lines       20545    20607      +62     
==========================================
+ Hits        15008    15061      +53     
- Misses       5537     5546       +9     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[cosmoJFH]

Hi team, we have planned to make new changes in the Euclid module in our next sprint, but we would need to complete this task beforehand. Do you need us to make any other thing related to this PR?

[cosmoJFH]

Hello @bsipocz, we are planning to submit new updates to the Euclid module, but we believe it would be best to close the existing PRs. Would you happen to have some time to look over this one? Thank you in advance.

[cosmoJFH]

Hi @bsipocz, we made a new branch to include all the new commits and synchronize the branch with the master one, and the PR automatically closed. But this PR is still valid, and we would like merge these changes. Could you reopen it?

[bsipocz]

hmm, the PR is closed as you have deleted the branch from the fork. Was that accidental?

(I have a backup copy of the branch locally, and am happy to try to push it back to your fork. I'm not sure if this PR can be reopened from it, but I suppose we'll see? Please let me know)

[cosmoJFH]

Hi @bsipocz, maybe it could be easier to open a new PR?

[bsipocz]

OK, I have a guess what was going on: is it possible that you have renamed the branch to ESA_euclid_EUCLIDSWRQ-250_siaps_function_new_old and created a new, updated one with ESA_euclid_EUCLIDSWRQ-250_siaps_function_new? That rename may have caused this closing of the PR with the weird status that the branch is deleted; even though I see a branch at the latest commit at 49845eb (but with the different name than this PR); and see the same name but with a different, more updated hash.

Either case, I couldn't really force this to reopen, maybe go ahead and indeed open a brand new one? Review should be more quick now that I cleared a lot from the backlog recently.

[cosmoJFH]

Hi @bsipocz, that is what happened. Sorry for any inconvenience. We will open a new PR.