[QUANTITY] Quantity "arguments"

[Patrick Dowler]

While I'm sure all this is very interesting, it seems way off topic to me. I 
am sure that's why only two people are left standing.

In the simple Quantity model that I put forward (somewhat privately, but that
didn't last long :-( I tried to draw from all the available approaches and 
ideas to make a "consensus". Of course, some ideas did not get included 
because they were logically inconsistent with others that were more commonly 
held, more valuable, more aesthetic, etc. 

The problem with this whole discussion is that it has degraded into "here's MY 
model - see how I did it right" with a response like "yeah, but here's MYYYY 
model, and it's pretty cool too". This gets us nowhere. 

At some point, people have to leave their models at home and provide 
constructive criticism of the idea on the table. If something is missing, say 
exactly what is missing. If something is wrong, by all means point it out.
But bringing a whole new model to the table doesn't help.

So far, I have seen nothing on this list since ADASS that hasn't been said 
before - either during the summer, at the Cambridge meeting, on a poster as 
ADASS, or private communication. Yet my dm at ivoa.net mailbox is filled with 
messages (on average 20KB!!!) not discussing the same thing.

my 2c (and 2c canadian isn't very much),

-- 
Patrick Dowler
Tel/Tél: (250) 363-6914                  | fax/télécopieur: (250) 363-0045
Canadian Astronomy Data Centre   | Centre canadien de donnees astronomiques
National Research Council Canada | Conseil national de recherches Canada
Government of Canada                  | Gouvernement du Canada
5071 West Saanich Road               | 5071, chemin West Saanich
Victoria, BC                                  | Victoria (C.-B.)