On Mon 2006-09-18T13:56:23 -0400, Alberto Conti hath writ:
> On Sep 18, 2006, at 11:32 AM, Rob Seaman wrote:
>
> >I think the nonchalant way this discussion has proceeded reflects
> >how few people take spherical trig as undergraduates. Anybody who
> >has ever cracked open Wm. Smart's book knows enough to be afraid,
> >very afraid :–)
I don't know about Rob, but before I was an undergraduate I was deriving the hyperbolic geometry equivalents on little notepads at the nurses station in between changing bedpans during the hospital night shift. No fear here, but also not much concern for sexagesimal, and I have begun to lose the point of the discussion.
> >I think this discussion is a question of data entry and
> >classification, not of mandating specific formats.
The ISO 6709 standard for latitude and longitude mentioned by Sebastien Derriere seems to draw from 1) the 1884 International Meridian Conference (the only citeable existing standard?) and 2) the desire to simplify the lives of touch-typed numeric keyboard entry clerks transcribing old tomes.
> Don't be nonchalant about this! Is there a course you can suggest I
> take on data entry and classification (on top of my mandatory
> spherical trig refresh)? ;-)
>
> I believe the issue IS formats. The IVOA should recommend a standard
> for the VO grounded in what users need/want thereby "guiding" users
> toward a better experience and an easier integration of VO tools.
Not even ISO 6709 handles some of the content used in old ephemerides where the sexagesimal entries sometimes had a fourth field used, with suitable subscript, to denote either "revolutions" or "days".
Does this IVOA application require the admission of revs or days? I'm really not sure what the question is anymore.
-- Steve Allen <sla-at-ucolick.org> WGS-84 (GPS) UCO/Lick Observatory Natural Sciences II, Room 165 Lat +36.99858 University of California Voice: +1 831 459 3046 Lng -122.06014 Santa Cruz, CA 95064 http://www.ucolick.org/~sla/ Hgt +250 mReceived on 2006-09-18Z21:23:54