Update of the IVOA UCD list incorporating items for planetary data

[Louys Mireille]

Hi Tom,  all

thanks for pointing this .
I agree this might be misleading .
I understood it myself as 'abbreviations are kept to a minimum length if 
applied...'

any other opinion?

thanks for your examples .
Mireille.

Le 29/08/2014 16:14, Mcglynn, Thomas A. (GSFC-6601) a écrit :
> Just a tiny editorial comment.  I was amused by the first statement in 
> section 1.1 of the UCD draft, i.e.,
>  "Abbreviations are kept to a minimum, and only if the result is not 
> ambiguous."
> In practice abbreviations are used extensively and no apparent attempt 
> has been made to minimize their usage.  Not saying there should be, 
> just that the quoted statement is contrary to the actual practice.  
> E.g., 11 of the 12 top level atoms are abbreviations -- only 'time' is 
> written in full.  The EM bands are mostly abbreviated and there a 
> bazillion
> uses of MHz and GHz, and "det" for detector and "freq" for frequency,  
> "obsty" for observatory and "tel" for telescope, "bib" for 
> bibliographic, ....
>
> I am not suggesting that UCDs be expanded, but that the statement I 
> mentioned above be elided.  We could just say
> "Abbreviations are used in contexts where their meaning is 
> unambiguous" and not make any claim that that use is limited.
>
>     Tom
>
> Louys Mireille wrote:
>> Dear Semantics member,
>> Dear UCD-maintenance group 's member,
>>
>> Here attached is a draft for the update of the UCD list in order to 
>> enrich the corpus with items covering the Planetary data use-case.
>>
>> New UCD strings have been proposed  by B. Cecconi et al.  at the IVOA 
>> Interop in Madrid and circulated via the wiki page
>> http://wiki.ivoa.net/twiki/bin/view/IVOA/PlanetaryUCD
>>
>> see attached Note:  SolarSystemUCD-V06.pdf
>>
>> The following working draft is open for discussion .
>>
>> Your comments and feedback are welcome .
>>
>> best wishes , Mireille
>>
>>
>>
>