Return to Home Page
Re: [vsnet-newvar 2225] Re: 155var near HX Peg - designation? > So now the observations of one star are recorded with two different > names in the VSNET database. Kato-san, the VSNET administrator, it is > your database. Is it the acceptable situation for you? > > You have already known that different names are used for one star. Why > didn't you call attention to us to use one common designation? Why > don't you merge the data of "HXPEGunknown" and > "USNO-B1.0_1026-0769191" in your database? Will naturally be merged. This type of name conversion is very easily done with the VSNET system (newly issued vsnet-recent*/vsnet-constel* messages already incorporate this change). I just removed some early observations not referring to USNO-B1.0_1026-0769191 but a blank field. These changes will be reflected on the public database within a day or so. > Sorry. I made a mistake. Please replace "CBAT" in my message to "GCVS > team" or "Dr. Samus". The CBAT is the correct reference, since the GCVS team assigns permanent designations of new novae upon request from the CBAT. As seems to be evident from the recent Nova Cru 2003 case, the nomenclature of these objects seems to require special approval of the CBAT (if the object is already destinted to DZ Cru, it seems to me nonsense to ask for special approval). Even if researchers like me repeatedly asked permanent designations for new objects (already sufficiently done behind the scenes), the GCVS team seems to be reluctant to make a decision independent from the CBAT. > Dr. Samus kindly assigns the GCVS number soon after the nova discovery > to avoid confusion. > > Kato-san kindly points out what temporary name should be used to > report to VSNET just after the nova discovery to avoid confusion. > > They seem the same principle to me. Special efforts are paid (almost) > only in the case of novae :-) We don't restrict this measure to novae. This is almost always applied when a new object receives wide attention. We never wished to use a non-specific name such as "Cataclysmic Variable in Ursa Major". If the GCVS team issues any permanent designations of variable star irrespective to new novae, we would be happy to prefer them. If everyone wishes for independent nomenclature system for newly recognized variables, we would be reluctantly ;-) issue new designations. Regards, Taichi Kato
Return to the Powerful Daisaku
vsnet-adm@kusastro.kyoto-u.ac.jp
