Update of the IVOA UCD list incorporating items for planetary data

[Louys Mireille]

Tom,

Sorry , I agree the sentence, as it is, is ambiguous and I am ready to 
change it as you suggested .
I just mentioned my interpretation to confirm the ambiguity .
This was written like this in the previous recommendation , it is not an 
add-on to this new version of the standard.
The part added is the list of *new *ucds in the reference list and at 
the end of the document in the Update Section.

So I think a subtitle to the document should state this more clearly.
"Update for Planetary data ", for instance.

thanks , Mireille.



  29/08/2014 16:59, Mcglynn, Thomas A. (GSFC-6601) a écrit :
> I googled  the phrase "abbreviations are kept to a minimum" as a 
> quoted phrase.
> Every use I see suggests that the <usage> of abbreviations is 
> minimized, not the <length>.  Here are the
> first few I see.
>
> - We try to make sure such /abbreviations are kept to a minimum/. If 
> necessary, we will provide an explanation of any abbreviations used.
> - Since this book is designed to be read in non-English-speaking (as 
> well as English-speaking) countries, /abbreviations are kept to a 
> minimum/.
> - In the following listing /abbreviations are kept to a minimum/.
> -The text is quite lavish — /abbreviations are kept to a minimum/.
> - all terms are defined clearly; and ○ /abbreviations are kept to a 
> minimum/.
> - The references are intended to be representative but not exhaustive, 
> and, as an aid to the reader, /abbreviations are kept to a minimum/.
>
> If the usage you suggested was meant, the I'd expect text following a 
> bit latter might say ... "t is ambiguous, time and temp  are used 
> instead" as opposed to the actual text "t is ambiguous time and 
> temperature are used instead"
>
>     Tom
>
> Louys Mireille wrote:
>> 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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.ivoa.net/pipermail/semantics/attachments/20140829/e9a7579b/attachment.html>