[vsnet-chat 4391] Re: constellation-preceded names

[Taichi Kato <tkato>]

Re: constellation-preceded names

> The datas wich I receive 
> (diskets, paper, email) are reformated in our format, checked, sorted and 
> then transfered to the CDS computer. That's why I am forced to add codes for 
> stars like XTEJ1118+480 whose name is of course restored in our database 
> (misc).

   Again, it is not a problem if this is used as metacodes, or personally.
However, it looks the usage (I think it improper) of constellation names
prceding other catalog names is becoming more and more prevalent.
Who, or what is system, is responsible for that??

   One of the most prominent side-effects of this usage is frequent
truncation of long names.  Some observers report UMAXTEJ1118+48, probably
because the observer's system doesn't allow more than 14 letters.
Simply removing the constellation code will effectively shorten,
and more correctly describe, the object name as XTEJ1118+480.

   But, a simple question - why the CDS system requires constellation names
for already cataloged objects?  People may wish to look for the data
of 3C273, but in order to get them, they must know that the object
is in Virgo constellation.

Regards,
Taichi Kato

VSNET Home Page

Return to Daisaku Nogami

---

vsnet-adm@kusastro.kyoto-u.ac.jp