(no subject)

From: Patricio F. Ortiz <pfo-at-star.le.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 18:40:56 +0100


Hi Andrea (et al :-)

Well, maybe we should ask ourselves if we should ditch the rule! I mean, why is it that substrings are not allowed? Is it because of impleemntation issues (eg, recovering data based on UCDs)? I personally see little use for that rule (perhaps it was written without looking at the existing UCDs)?

I see Alberto's point to go for the simplest solution, but I'd go one step further :-) :-)

Cheers,

Patricio
On 11/7/05, Andrea Preite Martinez <andrea.preitemartinez-at-rm.iasf.cnr.it> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> I received from the IVOA Exec a request to modify all UCD1+ words that
> do not conform to what is said in the standard UCD document, i.e.:
>
> UCD1+ words at the same level in the hierarchy cannot be a starting
> substring of another
>
Received on 2005-11-07Z17:41:30