seaman at noao.edu
Thu May 25 05:22:27 PDT 2006
> We could add special software that allows one to drop location
> or other elements after the distance of the object has been confirmed.
VOEvent has the notion of following up or superseding a prior
packet. Either of these could be used in the situation you
describe. With transients, one person's noise is another's signal,
so I certainly would characterize the detection of such bursts from a
planetary source as something devoid of research interest.
The issue with the observatory location is whether it should be
required by STC in the case of a geocentric expression. While this
might be a good idea for the reasons outlined by Arnold, I personally
think it should be optional (in this case) and left to the conscience
- or experimental design - of the author of the packet. In
particular, as I've just said, in the case of revising previously
reported geocentric coordinates, we already have a way to do that via
As tempting as it is to try to mandate good usage, I think such
efforts are doomed in general - and may be hard to define in
particular. One person's sloppy STC element may be another's lithe
and elegant compromise with heinous observational or investigational
As Arnold says:
>> Can we close this discussion?
All in favor of an optional observatory location for geocentric
More information about the dm