Vocab AND Ontology?

[Rob Seaman]

On Oct 9, 2007, at 9:02 AM, Ed Shaya wrote:

> Found 2 biggies.  There is extended_sources but not:
> sources
> 	point_sources alt unresolved_sources.

We're losing ever more clarity.  I thought this was to be a list of  
astronomical (i.e., physical) objects and processes, not any and all  
terms of empirical artifice.  The same star may or may not be a point  
source, depending only on the technology and point of view.

> Trouble already.  Rob Olling, is in my office, and he insists that
> L_dwarfs and T_dwarfs are simply not stars.  These are brown_dwarfs  
> which are not stars.  For the sake of simplicity, I can see leaving  
> such things as stars; including neutron stars, white dwarfs etc.   
> But, is this going to be acceptable to the IAU?  The argument is  
> beginning to filter out into the hallway.

Yes, yes - and Jupiter orbiting a brown dwarf would no longer be a  
planet.  A non-planet orbiting a non-star - certainly worthy of  
publication, but likely not as a "sky transient event".  These are  
all delightful discussions for Watson and Crick's favorite table at  
the Eagle.  I doubt they'll win anybody a Nobel Prize™.

Any of Rick's previous vocabularies would have been useful for  
VOEvent purposes.  I doubt we'll have much need to report assertions  
of set theory for follow-up observation.

I suggest again - let's start with the minimum list(s) needed to get  
the ball rolling and to support the utilitarian pursuit of  
astronomical science.  By starting with the verbatim IAU Thesaurus we  
avoid all issues of nuance and politics, we demonstrate proper  
respect for earlier efforts, and we position IVOA as a natural  
standard bearer to enhance the vocabularies.  Rather than adding to  
the Thesaurus, perhaps we should be considering renorming it into  
separate sub-vocabularies.  This will clarify the missing pieces  
(e.g., GRBs) needed for pragmatic transient reporting and  
classification.

I see Brian is agreeing with me - this is surely one of the warning  
signs of the approaching apocalypse.  Let me put it this way - I  
would prefer a minimal ontology to an overstuffed vocabulary list.

Rob