A modest proposal for VOEvent
Arnold Rots
arots at head.cfa.harvard.edu
Thu Mar 5 15:18:57 PST 2009
Still reinventing the wheel, uh?
<AstroCoords coord_system_id="TDB-ECLIPTIC-BARY" >
<Orbit>
<a unit="AU">1.5610990</a>
<e>0.4412673</e>
<i unit="deg">7.21282</i>
<Node unit="deg">353.14214</Node>
<Aop unit="deg">265.00121</Aop>
<M unit="deg">319.73232</M>
<T><ISOTime>1998-03-08T00:00:00</ISOTime></T>
</Orbit>
</AstroCoords>
Rob Seaman wrote:
> Hi Bob,
>
> I'm all for promoting adoption of prevetted standards. MPC 1-line
> format represents a C-like struct datatype. Maybe this is something
> to support, or maybe the XML-ness of breaking it out into explicit
> variables should win out. Arguments from both sides?
>
> Rob
> ----
>
> On Feb 22, 2009, at 5:42 PM, Bob Denny wrote:
>
> > Rick Hessman:
> >> I believe the thing to avoid is
> >>
> >> <orbitalElements q="1.2345" P="9.54321" Punits="days" ... />
> >>
> >> as too compact and illegible...
> >
> > and the values cannot be validated by a schema-driven parser. I
> > agree that this
> > is the wrong way to go!
> >
> >> ... and
> >> <orbitalElements>
> >> <q>
> >> <units>none</units>
> >> <value>1.2345</value>
> >> ...
> >> </q>
> >> ...
> >> </orbitalElements>
> >>
> >> as too verbose and cumbersome to parse.
> >
> > Also agreed. It's the opposite end of the spectrum and just as bad.
> >
> >> The only reasonable system
> >> is to use attributes for secondary information, e.g.
> >>
> >> <orbitalElements>
> >> <q units="none">1.2345</q>
> >> <P units="days">9.54321</P>
> >> </orbitalElements>
> >>
> >> but then, everyone has their own tastes (and those tastes even
> >> change).
> >
> > I'm a KISS Principle guy. The MPC has standard formats for numbered
> > asteroid and
> > cometary elements already, the so-called "1-line" format(s).
> > Everyone knows what
> > these are, how they are formatted, and what units they are in.
> > They've been
> > around for many years. MP versus cometary can be determined by
> > inspection. So
> > something as simple as
> >
> > <orbitalElements>K01FI5V 7.7 0.15 K014L 0.10308 ...</
> > orbitalElements>
> > <orbitalElements> PJ97T030 1998 03 9.3751 ...</
> > orbitalElements>
> >
> > would carry everything there is to know about the elements. If only
> > the number
> > or designator is given, that could automatically reference the MPC's
> > orbital
> > elements database. That would provide the "latest" elements if that
> > were
> > preferable (maybe you want to specify the elements that WERE used
> > and not the
> > elements TO use). So
> >
> > <orbitalElements>K01FI5V</orbitalElements>
> > <orbitalElements>0029P</orbitalElements>
> >
> > Now what about NEOs which have only a rough short-arc orbit, and for
> > which there
> > are no elements available? I've successfully used the MPC's "NEOCP
> > Ephemeris"
> > format. Needless to say, the position of an NEO is not well known
> > very far
> > ahead, so this would apply only to timely observations in response
> > to a VOEvent.
> > In that case, some ephemeris lines covering the expected validity
> > period of the
> > event, spaced an hour or two apart, should be "good enough". One can
> > do
> > something like a Lagrange interpolation over that data and get a
> > pretty good
> > position. So something like
> >
> > <ephemeris name="A123456789">
> > <pos>2004 10 27 02 01.6915 -40.095</pos>
> > <pos>2004 10 27 03 01.6834 -40.167</pos>
> > ...
> > <ephemeris>
> >
> > -- Bob
> >
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arnold H. Rots Chandra X-ray Science Center
Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory tel: +1 617 496 7701
60 Garden Street, MS 67 fax: +1 617 495 7356
Cambridge, MA 02138 arots at head.cfa.harvard.edu
USA http://hea-www.harvard.edu/~arots/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
More information about the voevent
mailing list