Class in vocabulary (Was: Re: Format of tokens

[Brian Thomas]

On Wednesday 14 November 2007 1:42:21 pm Brian Thomas wrote:
> #Class
> 
> Similar argument to "CompoundObject". If this is meant to be "Astronomy object class", then
> its not needed, as we define everything explicitly (I would hope..e.g. no field under AstroOBject
> called "class")

Actually on the way home from work yesterday something about this bugged me, and I realized
later what it was. This vocabulary must be able to describe any variety of data products, which
will undoubtably include existing tables from journals. I have seen many of these tables include
a "Classification" column so that the object on the row is defined. In this sense, I can see why
we would need to include "Class" in the vocabulary, but hopefully, it would go in a "meta" rather
than an "astro" namespace, so that its sense is any class of object.  Perhaps that is also the
spirit in which you where including "CompoundObject" (e.g. a "band-aide" concept to aid in
labeling archival data)?

Regards,

=brian