[Message Prev][Message Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Message Index][Thread Index]
[vsnet-id 320] Re: 'Q' numbers of 'The Astronomer'
- Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 21:56:10 +0000
- To: vsnet-id@kusastro.kyoto-u.ac.jp, vsnet-newvar@kusastro.kyoto-u.ac.jp
- From: crawl@zoom.co.uk
- Subject: [vsnet-id 320] Re: 'Q' numbers of 'The Astronomer'
- Cc: Guy M Hurst <guy@tahq.demon.co.uk>, Bela1996@aol.com, kl.bernhard@aon.at, ndj@blueyonder.co.uk, vsolj-db@ooruri.kusastro.kyoto-u.ac.jp, wquester@aol.com, Mike Collins <101763.3365@compuserve.com>
- In-Reply-To: <IGtmSuABLlR6Ewok@tahq.demon.co.uk>
- References: <200012241548.AAA03313@ceres.kusastro.kyoto-u.ac.jp><200012241548.AAA03313@ceres.kusastro.kyoto-u.ac.jp>
- Sender: owner-vsnet-id@kusastro.kyoto-u.ac.jp
At 19:47 24/12/00 +0000, Guy M Hurst wrote:
>The whole point of logging 'Q' numbers is to help us at the headquarters
>of 'The Astronomer' keep track of all discovery claims reported to us
>from around the world (including Japan!) particularly as sometimes we
>receive three or more in one night!
>
>It should also be borne in mind that the 'Q' numbering system is not
>restricted to new variables but potential discoveries of comets,
>asteroids, novae, supernovae etc.
>
>By definition, 'Q' numbers are NOT designations and we do NOT publish
>them (nor do we intend to do so) since the vast majority of such claims
>are false alarms. I would much appreciate it if you could avoid logging
>observations with 'Q' numbers.
It is interesting to note, for example, that the MISAO project uses
internal identifications for pending/unconfirmed objects. This enables
objects of all astronomic flavours to be checked for "newness", and when
shown to be new, they are designated by an appropriate prefix.
However, as these identifications remain strictly internal to that project,
and are not promulgated further, they never cause confusion in the broader
world.
I suppose the main problem with most things here has been that there is a
tendency for TASV to sound equivalent to TAV, whereas is is more akin to
Q... ...if you follow that ;) , although it seems that Q has never been
intended as a firm ID, it has "got out".
Meanwhile, slightly connected to an earlier mail I had from a separate
source altogether, but partway germane: data is the responsibility of the
provider, not the user. Even in these days of relatively easy electronic
communication, it is unrealistic to expect all observers to behave
themselves with respect to the nuances of nomenclature (or even updates for
that matter) unless forced to do so. Not that I have a problem with
observers who don't necessarily keep up to date with things like this, I
just don't think people should be surprised by them not doing so!
John
John Greaves
UK
Return to Daisaku Nogami
vsnet-adm@kusastro.kyoto-u.ac.jp