VOConcepts paper

[Doug Tody]

The use-case identified in Madrid, which prompted the need for standard
object type names was searching by object type in SSA.  We want to be
able to do things like query for spectra where targetclass=QSO.  I was
expecting to see a simple list of names like "star", "galaxy", "PN",
"QSO", "AGN", "GRB", etc., which is what I think users would like to
search for, but what we have instead are more UCD-like names such as
"process.variation.burst;em.gamma" which I guess indicates a GRB.

I can see where it could be useful to specify more precisely what type
of object we have as the UCD approach suggested permits, but it would
also be useful to standardize the actual, simple acronyms commonly used
by astronomers.  Perhaps what we need are two lists, one for precise
characterisation of physical object types, another defining the common,
standard acronym associated with such object types.  This could be done
by merely defining a standard list of acronyms for object types, and
assigning one to each of the object type UCDs, where appropriate.  - Doug



On Wed, 30 Nov 2005, Roy Williams wrote:

> Please find attached a white paper from Andrea Preite-Martinez, the chairman 
> of the IVOA Semantics working group, which is a first attempt to build a 
> standard vocabulary for astronomical phenomena and for astronomical objects. 
> I would like to have a brief discussion of this at the VOEvent meeting next 
> week, and/or receive comments by email from those who cannot attend the 
> meeting. Rick Hessman has already worked on exactly this topic.
>
> I would like to compile a "group response feedback" on this paper for Andrea 
> and the Semantics WG.
>
> Roy Williams
>
> California Institute of Technology
> 626 395 3670
>
>