This is a timely discussion for the VOEvent folks, but likely
perplexing for the UCD folks. The gist of my previous comments was not
that VOEvent didn't need to wrestle with characterizing coherent
descriptions for the "hypothesis" section of an event. The hypothesis
is the key to fielding a richly useful VOEvent facility. Rather, I
question whether a UCD, per se, is the correct way to represent this
kind of information - clearly itself not a brand new topic for the UCD
list :-) It might be that we need to borrow the syntax from UCD's and
roll our own - or it might be that we just need to pick another
namespace(s). Both the VO and the larger astronomical community would
benefit from wrestling with the issues Rick has raised. In the mean
time, Patricio asks a lot of good questions.
Rob Seaman
NOAO
Received on 2005-04-27Z16:11:44