Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: re batch upload and vsx

Expand Messages
  • duble.stars
    Ponder, if you will, the modal investigator. Not the model one typoed, but the modal one. SIMBAD is their avenue of primary investigation. In the field they
    Message 1 of 12 , Mar 12, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Ponder, if you will, the modal investigator. Not the model one
      typoed, but the modal one.

      SIMBAD is their avenue of primary investigation.

      In the field they are examining they have an object, or possibly they
      have a list of objects resulting from some survey research or other.

      Using the coordinates of these objects they do an investigation using
      SIMBAD. You'll see evidence of this sort of thing in the recent
      SuperWASP variables' preprint.

      At this point in the proceedings variability doesn't necessarily even
      enter into any considerations.

      The results of the search reveal some SIMBAD objects, along with links
      to any articles on those objects.

      Even GCVS inclusion is not strictly relevant within this context. If
      it's in GCVS and SIMBAD has it properly identified as a GCVS object,
      there may well be a link, but that's mostly incidental, what is more
      important is the summary data in SIMBAD and the bibliographic links
      returned via SIMBAD.

      To the modal user.

      If the object has been written about in OEJV the SIMBAD links will be
      there and the bibliographic link will consequently be there and the
      investigator will be able to decide from the abstract as to whether it
      contains anything of relevance to themselves.

      If the object is in GCVS there may or may not be a link to it there,
      though such is mostly irrelevant.

      If the object is in VSX as either completely fresh knowledge or
      revised knowledge the modal investigator will not even know of this
      interface's existance, and even more relevantly nichified
      investigators will not know of its existance, and SIMBAD certainly
      won't know about it, so it will not be linked to.

      This is not about "john's" comments or thoughts or viewpoints. This.
      Is. How. It. Is.

      And this is how it will remain for a long time to come, VO not
      withstanding, as much of said is all talk and no deliver, the vast
      majority of the limited deliver merely being changes in already extant
      systems such that they are now VO compatible.

      People still use, the incidentally now VO compatible, SIMBAD.


      Apparently, from something Chris said at one point in the past,
      Patrick's looking towards some form of publication of fresh data.

      This happenstance possibility is not the way a professionally minded
      endeavour progresses.

      Nigh on two years ago I stressed, repeatedly, to Arne (especially) and
      Chris that without some sort of formally infrastructured support from
      AAVSO enabling serious regular publication of these objects, and
      especially not "one day eventually" level jaavso, or even ejaavso
      publication, but met deadline publication, it was all mostly a waste
      of time.

      The traditional archival nature of aavso tends to lead to
      institutional biases within aavso such that it feels archivage is the
      be all and end all.

      "Fullness of time" statements are also valid enough, but it is now
      beyond the fullness of time, if it was to be considered a significant
      and meaningful system.

      But that's possibly tending towards thoughts and comments and
      viewpoints of "john's", so let's just go back to the top bit shall we?

      Now then, here's this object, how should I research it, well, let's
      see, ah, yes, let's look in SIMBAD.

      Please, no thoughts or comments of the marketing / publicising level
      re VSX.

      Try to think wider.

      You do not even have to know that either of OEJV, IBVS or GCVS exist,
      you just do a coordinate search in SIMBAD, and if they're SIMBAD
      object linked, connections arise, in an object orientated, not subject
      or venue orientated, way. The delivery medium being known is not
      relevant in the elibrary age.

      To finish I'd best clarify I'm only talking about fresh and novel
      information, there's no point in VSX regurgitating data it's merely
      swallowed from elsewhere via any linkage to SIMBAD, but just the new
      work done, whether revisions or completely new.

      VSX has and will continue to fail in what was considered a strongly
      desired primary remit by many here, and also in the objective context
      of relevance. Bunging together a lot of catalogues willy nilly simply
      isn't a sufficient raison d'etre.

      It simply fails in terms of relevance, based on connectivity, whereas
      OEJV simply does not, no matter what the qualities of either are.
      It's up to the author of a paper to ensure that whomever alights on
      that work finds it meaningful and/or useful, it's no real reflection
      on the venue used (within reasonable limits, that is).

      John
    • Martin Nicholson
      Some interesting analysis from John. In my own case it was a straight choice - it was VSX (ideally in batch mode) or nowhere. A suggested/required OEJV
      Message 2 of 12 , Mar 12, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        Some interesting analysis from John.
         
        In my own case it was a straight choice - it was VSX (ideally in batch mode) or nowhere. A suggested/required OEJV presentation method that took perhaps 10 minutes per red variable star is fine for small numbers. But suppose I have 100 of the little dears (16 hours) - or 500 (80 hours) or even 1500 (240 hours).
         
        There is no way I would, as an amateur, spend the equivalent of 6 full working weeks for so little gain (Simbad listing) over and above VSX listing.
         
        Yes of course I would like my discoveries in Simbad - and nothing I have read has made me think that this will not happen eventually via VSX/AAVSO
         
        Cheers
         
        Martin N
         


        "duble.stars" <duble.stars@...> wrote:

        Ponder, if you will, the modal investigator. Not the model one
        typoed, but the modal one.

        SIMBAD is their avenue of primary investigation.

        In the field they are examining they have an object, or possibly they
        have a list of objects resulting from some survey research or other.

        Using the coordinates of these objects they do an investigation using
        SIMBAD. You'll see evidence of this sort of thing in the recent
        SuperWASP variables' preprint.

        At this point in the proceedings variability doesn't necessarily even
        enter into any considerations.

        The results of the search reveal some SIMBAD objects, along with links
        to any articles on those objects.

        Even GCVS inclusion is not strictly relevant within this context. If
        it's in GCVS and SIMBAD has it properly identified as a GCVS object,
        there may well be a link, but that's mostly incidental, what is more
        important is the summary data in SIMBAD and the bibliographic links
        returned via SIMBAD.

        To the modal user.

        If the object has been written about in OEJV the SIMBAD links will be
        there and the bibliographic link will consequently be there and the
        investigator will be able to decide from the abstract as to whether it
        contains anything of relevance to themselves.

        If the object is in GCVS there may or may not be a link to it there,
        though such is mostly irrelevant.

        If the object is in VSX as either completely fresh knowledge or
        revised knowledge the modal investigator will not even know of this
        interface's existance, and even more relevantly nichified
        investigators will not know of its existance, and SIMBAD certainly
        won't know about it, so it will not be linked to.

        This is not about "john's" comments or thoughts or viewpoints. This.
        Is. How. It. Is.

        And this is how it will remain for a long time to come, VO not
        withstanding, as much of said is all talk and no deliver, the vast
        majority of the limited deliver merely being changes in already extant
        systems such that they are now VO compatible.

        People still use, the incidentally now VO compatible, SIMBAD.

        Apparently, from something Chris said at one point in the past,
        Patrick's looking towards some form of publication of fresh data.

        This happenstance possibility is not the way a professionally minded
        endeavour progresses.

        Nigh on two years ago I stressed, repeatedly, to Arne (especially) and
        Chris that without some sort of formally infrastructured support from
        AAVSO enabling serious regular publication of these objects, and
        especially not "one day eventually" level jaavso, or even ejaavso
        publication, but met deadline publication, it was all mostly a waste
        of time.

        The traditional archival nature of aavso tends to lead to
        institutional biases within aavso such that it feels archivage is the
        be all and end all.

        "Fullness of time" statements are also valid enough, but it is now
        beyond the fullness of time, if it was to be considered a significant
        and meaningful system.

        But that's possibly tending towards thoughts and comments and
        viewpoints of "john's", so let's just go back to the top bit shall we?

        Now then, here's this object, how should I research it, well, let's
        see, ah, yes, let's look in SIMBAD.

        Please, no thoughts or comments of the marketing / publicising level
        re VSX.

        Try to think wider.

        You do not even have to know that either of OEJV, IBVS or GCVS exist,
        you just do a coordinate search in SIMBAD, and if they're SIMBAD
        object linked, connections arise, in an object orientated, not subject
        or venue orientated, way. The delivery medium being known is not
        relevant in the elibrary age.

        To finish I'd best clarify I'm only talking about fresh and novel
        information, there's no point in VSX regurgitating data it's merely
        swallowed from elsewhere via any linkage to SIMBAD, but just the new
        work done, whether revisions or completely new.

        VSX has and will continue to fail in what was considered a strongly
        desired primary remit by many here, and also in the objective context
        of relevance. Bunging together a lot of catalogues willy nilly simply
        isn't a sufficient raison d'etre.

        It simply fails in terms of relevance, based on connectivity, whereas
        OEJV simply does not, no matter what the qualities of either are.
        It's up to the author of a paper to ensure that whomever alights on
        that work finds it meaningful and/or useful, it's no real reflection
        on the venue used (within reasonable limits, that is).

        John



        Inbox full of unwanted email? Get leading protection and 1GB storage with All New Yahoo! Mail.

      • Michael Koppelman
        Yup, true enough. On the other hand, if you want to know how many RR Lyraes have a period between P and P+dP, god help you in SIMBAD or ADS. There are a ton of
        Message 3 of 12 , Mar 12, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          Yup, true enough.

          On the other hand, if you want to know how many RR Lyraes have a
          period between P and P+dP, god help you in SIMBAD or ADS. There are a
          ton of reasons why this database makes sense, mainly because there IS
          no such database. Distributing the care and feeding among the
          variable star community is brilliant, having the AAVSO shepherd it
          into the coming millennia is logical and, like Jim said, thank god
          this is not an either-or situation.

          Variable stars are not the cutting edge of professional astronomy
          anymore. But every pro I know, when they are looking for data on
          variable stars, turn to the AAVSO. We have a niche and we are
          continuing to hit it out of the park. The only thing wrong here is
          the lack of infinite resources.

          M.


          On Mar 12, 2007, at 3:49 AM, duble.stars wrote:

          >
          > Ponder, if you will, the modal investigator. Not the model one
          > typoed, but the modal one.
          >
          > SIMBAD is their avenue of primary investigation.
          >
          > In the field they are examining they have an object, or possibly they
          > have a list of objects resulting from some survey research or other.
          >
          > Using the coordinates of these objects they do an investigation using
          > SIMBAD. You'll see evidence of this sort of thing in the recent
          > SuperWASP variables' preprint.
          >
          > At this point in the proceedings variability doesn't necessarily even
          > enter into any considerations.
          >
          > The results of the search reveal some SIMBAD objects, along with links
          > to any articles on those objects.
          >
          > Even GCVS inclusion is not strictly relevant within this context. If
          > it's in GCVS and SIMBAD has it properly identified as a GCVS object,
          > there may well be a link, but that's mostly incidental, what is more
          > important is the summary data in SIMBAD and the bibliographic links
          > returned via SIMBAD.
          >
          > To the modal user.
          >
          > If the object has been written about in OEJV the SIMBAD links will be
          > there and the bibliographic link will consequently be there and the
          > investigator will be able to decide from the abstract as to whether it
          > contains anything of relevance to themselves.
          >
          > If the object is in GCVS there may or may not be a link to it there,
          > though such is mostly irrelevant.
          >
          > If the object is in VSX as either completely fresh knowledge or
          > revised knowledge the modal investigator will not even know of this
          > interface's existance, and even more relevantly nichified
          > investigators will not know of its existance, and SIMBAD certainly
          > won't know about it, so it will not be linked to.
          >
          > This is not about "john's" comments or thoughts or viewpoints. This.
          > Is. How. It. Is.
          >
          > And this is how it will remain for a long time to come, VO not
          > withstanding, as much of said is all talk and no deliver, the vast
          > majority of the limited deliver merely being changes in already extant
          > systems such that they are now VO compatible.
          >
          > People still use, the incidentally now VO compatible, SIMBAD.
          >
          >
          > Apparently, from something Chris said at one point in the past,
          > Patrick's looking towards some form of publication of fresh data.
          >
          > This happenstance possibility is not the way a professionally minded
          > endeavour progresses.
          >
          > Nigh on two years ago I stressed, repeatedly, to Arne (especially) and
          > Chris that without some sort of formally infrastructured support from
          > AAVSO enabling serious regular publication of these objects, and
          > especially not "one day eventually" level jaavso, or even ejaavso
          > publication, but met deadline publication, it was all mostly a waste
          > of time.
          >
          > The traditional archival nature of aavso tends to lead to
          > institutional biases within aavso such that it feels archivage is the
          > be all and end all.
          >
          > "Fullness of time" statements are also valid enough, but it is now
          > beyond the fullness of time, if it was to be considered a significant
          > and meaningful system.
          >
          > But that's possibly tending towards thoughts and comments and
          > viewpoints of "john's", so let's just go back to the top bit shall we?
          >
          > Now then, here's this object, how should I research it, well, let's
          > see, ah, yes, let's look in SIMBAD.
          >
          > Please, no thoughts or comments of the marketing / publicising level
          > re VSX.
          >
          > Try to think wider.
          >
          > You do not even have to know that either of OEJV, IBVS or GCVS exist,
          > you just do a coordinate search in SIMBAD, and if they're SIMBAD
          > object linked, connections arise, in an object orientated, not subject
          > or venue orientated, way. The delivery medium being known is not
          > relevant in the elibrary age.
          >
          > To finish I'd best clarify I'm only talking about fresh and novel
          > information, there's no point in VSX regurgitating data it's merely
          > swallowed from elsewhere via any linkage to SIMBAD, but just the new
          > work done, whether revisions or completely new.
          >
          > VSX has and will continue to fail in what was considered a strongly
          > desired primary remit by many here, and also in the objective context
          > of relevance. Bunging together a lot of catalogues willy nilly simply
          > isn't a sufficient raison d'etre.
          >
          > It simply fails in terms of relevance, based on connectivity, whereas
          > OEJV simply does not, no matter what the qualities of either are.
          > It's up to the author of a paper to ensure that whomever alights on
          > that work finds it meaningful and/or useful, it's no real reflection
          > on the venue used (within reasonable limits, that is).
          >
          > John
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------
          > ~-->
          > Check out the new improvements in Yahoo! Groups email.
          > http://us.click.yahoo.com/4It09A/fOaOAA/yQLSAA/d_XolB/TM
          > --------------------------------------------------------------------
          > ~->
          >
          >
          > Yahoo! Groups Links
          >
          >
          >
        • duble.stars
          Some of the below presupposes that the RR Lyr periods within VSX are authoritative in some way, that VSX is complete with respect to RR Lyr periods, and that
          Message 4 of 12 , Mar 12, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            Some of the below presupposes that the RR Lyr periods within VSX are
            authoritative in some way, that VSX is complete with respect to RR Lyr
            periods, and that the wider universe has heard of VSX, such that
            publishing an RR Lyrae period solely in VSX is going to somehow lead
            to it being found by a wider community that is not able to know of
            vsx's existance.

            There's too much emphasis on the database management system and not
            enough realisation about the use of actual database content.

            Meanwhile, unless Patrick has upped his own paper's contents on RR Lyr
            stars to VSX, via the fortunate happenstance that the author of said
            paper, which contains many new and revised RR Lyr periods, happens to
            be involved with VSX, then n00 revised, confirmed, and new RR Lyr
            periods just won't be in VSX.

            Over and above the point of someone knowing to look there for them.

            Meanwhile SIMBAD4 can be trawled for RR Lyr variables. Whether
            Patrick's RR Lyr variables are in SIMBAD4 I have not checked.
            However, SIMBAD searches on specific objects will lead an investigator
            to see his paper included in the bibliographic links, and subsequently
            the full data can be traced to vizier and/or CDS ftp holdings. And
            people know to use SIMBAD to look up information.

            John

            --- In vsx-dis@yahoogroups.com, Michael Koppelman <lolife@...> wrote:
            >
            > Yup, true enough.
            >
            > On the other hand, if you want to know how many RR Lyraes have a
            > period between P and P+dP, god help you in SIMBAD or ADS. There are a
            > ton of reasons why this database makes sense, mainly because there IS
            > no such database. Distributing the care and feeding among the
            > variable star community is brilliant, having the AAVSO shepherd it
            > into the coming millennia is logical and, like Jim said, thank god
            > this is not an either-or situation.
            >
            > Variable stars are not the cutting edge of professional astronomy
            > anymore. But every pro I know, when they are looking for data on
            > variable stars, turn to the AAVSO. We have a niche and we are
            > continuing to hit it out of the park. The only thing wrong here is
            > the lack of infinite resources.
            >
            > M.
            >
            >
            > On Mar 12, 2007, at 3:49 AM, duble.stars wrote:
            >
            > >
            > > Ponder, if you will, the modal investigator. Not the model one
            > > typoed, but the modal one.
            > >
            > > SIMBAD is their avenue of primary investigation.
            > >
            > > In the field they are examining they have an object, or possibly they
            > > have a list of objects resulting from some survey research or other.
            > >
            > > Using the coordinates of these objects they do an investigation using
            > > SIMBAD. You'll see evidence of this sort of thing in the recent
            > > SuperWASP variables' preprint.
            > >
            > > At this point in the proceedings variability doesn't necessarily even
            > > enter into any considerations.
            > >
            > > The results of the search reveal some SIMBAD objects, along with links
            > > to any articles on those objects.
            > >
            > > Even GCVS inclusion is not strictly relevant within this context. If
            > > it's in GCVS and SIMBAD has it properly identified as a GCVS object,
            > > there may well be a link, but that's mostly incidental, what is more
            > > important is the summary data in SIMBAD and the bibliographic links
            > > returned via SIMBAD.
            > >
            > > To the modal user.
            > >
            > > If the object has been written about in OEJV the SIMBAD links will be
            > > there and the bibliographic link will consequently be there and the
            > > investigator will be able to decide from the abstract as to whether it
            > > contains anything of relevance to themselves.
            > >
            > > If the object is in GCVS there may or may not be a link to it there,
            > > though such is mostly irrelevant.
            > >
            > > If the object is in VSX as either completely fresh knowledge or
            > > revised knowledge the modal investigator will not even know of this
            > > interface's existance, and even more relevantly nichified
            > > investigators will not know of its existance, and SIMBAD certainly
            > > won't know about it, so it will not be linked to.
            > >
            > > This is not about "john's" comments or thoughts or viewpoints. This.
            > > Is. How. It. Is.
            > >
            > > And this is how it will remain for a long time to come, VO not
            > > withstanding, as much of said is all talk and no deliver, the vast
            > > majority of the limited deliver merely being changes in already extant
            > > systems such that they are now VO compatible.
            > >
            > > People still use, the incidentally now VO compatible, SIMBAD.
            > >
            > >
            > > Apparently, from something Chris said at one point in the past,
            > > Patrick's looking towards some form of publication of fresh data.
            > >
            > > This happenstance possibility is not the way a professionally minded
            > > endeavour progresses.
            > >
            > > Nigh on two years ago I stressed, repeatedly, to Arne (especially) and
            > > Chris that without some sort of formally infrastructured support from
            > > AAVSO enabling serious regular publication of these objects, and
            > > especially not "one day eventually" level jaavso, or even ejaavso
            > > publication, but met deadline publication, it was all mostly a waste
            > > of time.
            > >
            > > The traditional archival nature of aavso tends to lead to
            > > institutional biases within aavso such that it feels archivage is the
            > > be all and end all.
            > >
            > > "Fullness of time" statements are also valid enough, but it is now
            > > beyond the fullness of time, if it was to be considered a significant
            > > and meaningful system.
            > >
            > > But that's possibly tending towards thoughts and comments and
            > > viewpoints of "john's", so let's just go back to the top bit shall we?
            > >
            > > Now then, here's this object, how should I research it, well, let's
            > > see, ah, yes, let's look in SIMBAD.
            > >
            > > Please, no thoughts or comments of the marketing / publicising level
            > > re VSX.
            > >
            > > Try to think wider.
            > >
            > > You do not even have to know that either of OEJV, IBVS or GCVS exist,
            > > you just do a coordinate search in SIMBAD, and if they're SIMBAD
            > > object linked, connections arise, in an object orientated, not subject
            > > or venue orientated, way. The delivery medium being known is not
            > > relevant in the elibrary age.
            > >
            > > To finish I'd best clarify I'm only talking about fresh and novel
            > > information, there's no point in VSX regurgitating data it's merely
            > > swallowed from elsewhere via any linkage to SIMBAD, but just the new
            > > work done, whether revisions or completely new.
            > >
            > > VSX has and will continue to fail in what was considered a strongly
            > > desired primary remit by many here, and also in the objective context
            > > of relevance. Bunging together a lot of catalogues willy nilly simply
            > > isn't a sufficient raison d'etre.
            > >
            > > It simply fails in terms of relevance, based on connectivity, whereas
            > > OEJV simply does not, no matter what the qualities of either are.
            > > It's up to the author of a paper to ensure that whomever alights on
            > > that work finds it meaningful and/or useful, it's no real reflection
            > > on the venue used (within reasonable limits, that is).
            > >
            > > John
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------
            > > ~-->
            > > Check out the new improvements in Yahoo! Groups email.
            > > http://us.click.yahoo.com/4It09A/fOaOAA/yQLSAA/d_XolB/TM
            > > --------------------------------------------------------------------
            > > ~->
            > >
            > >
            > > Yahoo! Groups Links
            > >
            > >
            > >
            >
          • Michael Koppelman
            Well, I just did a search in VSX, which took approximately 1 second, and got 10,009 RR Lyrae stars back. How long would it take you to do that in SIMBAD, John?
            Message 5 of 12 , Mar 12, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              Well, I just did a search in VSX, which took approximately 1 second,
              and got 10,009 RR Lyrae stars back. How long would it take you to do
              that in SIMBAD, John? Is a sample of 10,000 stars too small to do
              statistical work on?

              VSX is not a replacement of the published record, it is IN ADDITION
              TO. Do you need to look some of those words up? 'Cause I don't get
              what is hard to understand about that.

              And what is your suggestion, by the way? Should we delete VSX? Is
              that a step forward?

              M.


              On Mar 12, 2007, at 10:46 AM, duble.stars wrote:

              >
              > Some of the below presupposes that the RR Lyr periods within VSX are
              > authoritative in some way, that VSX is complete with respect to RR Lyr
              > periods, and that the wider universe has heard of VSX, such that
              > publishing an RR Lyrae period solely in VSX is going to somehow lead
              > to it being found by a wider community that is not able to know of
              > vsx's existance.
              >
              > There's too much emphasis on the database management system and not
              > enough realisation about the use of actual database content.
              >
              > Meanwhile, unless Patrick has upped his own paper's contents on RR Lyr
              > stars to VSX, via the fortunate happenstance that the author of said
              > paper, which contains many new and revised RR Lyr periods, happens to
              > be involved with VSX, then n00 revised, confirmed, and new RR Lyr
              > periods just won't be in VSX.
              >
              > Over and above the point of someone knowing to look there for them.
              >
              > Meanwhile SIMBAD4 can be trawled for RR Lyr variables. Whether
              > Patrick's RR Lyr variables are in SIMBAD4 I have not checked.
              > However, SIMBAD searches on specific objects will lead an investigator
              > to see his paper included in the bibliographic links, and subsequently
              > the full data can be traced to vizier and/or CDS ftp holdings. And
              > people know to use SIMBAD to look up information.
              >
              > John
              >
              > --- In vsx-dis@yahoogroups.com, Michael Koppelman <lolife@...> wrote:
              >>
              >> Yup, true enough.
              >>
              >> On the other hand, if you want to know how many RR Lyraes have a
              >> period between P and P+dP, god help you in SIMBAD or ADS. There are a
              >> ton of reasons why this database makes sense, mainly because there IS
              >> no such database. Distributing the care and feeding among the
              >> variable star community is brilliant, having the AAVSO shepherd it
              >> into the coming millennia is logical and, like Jim said, thank god
              >> this is not an either-or situation.
              >>
              >> Variable stars are not the cutting edge of professional astronomy
              >> anymore. But every pro I know, when they are looking for data on
              >> variable stars, turn to the AAVSO. We have a niche and we are
              >> continuing to hit it out of the park. The only thing wrong here is
              >> the lack of infinite resources.
              >>
              >> M.
              >>
              >>
              >> On Mar 12, 2007, at 3:49 AM, duble.stars wrote:
              >>
              >>>
              >>> Ponder, if you will, the modal investigator. Not the model one
              >>> typoed, but the modal one.
              >>>
              >>> SIMBAD is their avenue of primary investigation.
              >>>
              >>> In the field they are examining they have an object, or possibly
              >>> they
              >>> have a list of objects resulting from some survey research or other.
              >>>
              >>> Using the coordinates of these objects they do an investigation
              >>> using
              >>> SIMBAD. You'll see evidence of this sort of thing in the recent
              >>> SuperWASP variables' preprint.
              >>>
              >>> At this point in the proceedings variability doesn't necessarily
              >>> even
              >>> enter into any considerations.
              >>>
              >>> The results of the search reveal some SIMBAD objects, along with
              >>> links
              >>> to any articles on those objects.
              >>>
              >>> Even GCVS inclusion is not strictly relevant within this
              >>> context. If
              >>> it's in GCVS and SIMBAD has it properly identified as a GCVS object,
              >>> there may well be a link, but that's mostly incidental, what is more
              >>> important is the summary data in SIMBAD and the bibliographic links
              >>> returned via SIMBAD.
              >>>
              >>> To the modal user.
              >>>
              >>> If the object has been written about in OEJV the SIMBAD links
              >>> will be
              >>> there and the bibliographic link will consequently be there and the
              >>> investigator will be able to decide from the abstract as to
              >>> whether it
              >>> contains anything of relevance to themselves.
              >>>
              >>> If the object is in GCVS there may or may not be a link to it there,
              >>> though such is mostly irrelevant.
              >>>
              >>> If the object is in VSX as either completely fresh knowledge or
              >>> revised knowledge the modal investigator will not even know of this
              >>> interface's existance, and even more relevantly nichified
              >>> investigators will not know of its existance, and SIMBAD certainly
              >>> won't know about it, so it will not be linked to.
              >>>
              >>> This is not about "john's" comments or thoughts or viewpoints.
              >>> This.
              >>> Is. How. It. Is.
              >>>
              >>> And this is how it will remain for a long time to come, VO not
              >>> withstanding, as much of said is all talk and no deliver, the vast
              >>> majority of the limited deliver merely being changes in already
              >>> extant
              >>> systems such that they are now VO compatible.
              >>>
              >>> People still use, the incidentally now VO compatible, SIMBAD.
              >>>
              >>>
              >>> Apparently, from something Chris said at one point in the past,
              >>> Patrick's looking towards some form of publication of fresh data.
              >>>
              >>> This happenstance possibility is not the way a professionally minded
              >>> endeavour progresses.
              >>>
              >>> Nigh on two years ago I stressed, repeatedly, to Arne
              >>> (especially) and
              >>> Chris that without some sort of formally infrastructured support
              >>> from
              >>> AAVSO enabling serious regular publication of these objects, and
              >>> especially not "one day eventually" level jaavso, or even ejaavso
              >>> publication, but met deadline publication, it was all mostly a waste
              >>> of time.
              >>>
              >>> The traditional archival nature of aavso tends to lead to
              >>> institutional biases within aavso such that it feels archivage is
              >>> the
              >>> be all and end all.
              >>>
              >>> "Fullness of time" statements are also valid enough, but it is now
              >>> beyond the fullness of time, if it was to be considered a
              >>> significant
              >>> and meaningful system.
              >>>
              >>> But that's possibly tending towards thoughts and comments and
              >>> viewpoints of "john's", so let's just go back to the top bit
              >>> shall we?
              >>>
              >>> Now then, here's this object, how should I research it, well, let's
              >>> see, ah, yes, let's look in SIMBAD.
              >>>
              >>> Please, no thoughts or comments of the marketing / publicising level
              >>> re VSX.
              >>>
              >>> Try to think wider.
              >>>
              >>> You do not even have to know that either of OEJV, IBVS or GCVS
              >>> exist,
              >>> you just do a coordinate search in SIMBAD, and if they're SIMBAD
              >>> object linked, connections arise, in an object orientated, not
              >>> subject
              >>> or venue orientated, way. The delivery medium being known is not
              >>> relevant in the elibrary age.
              >>>
              >>> To finish I'd best clarify I'm only talking about fresh and novel
              >>> information, there's no point in VSX regurgitating data it's merely
              >>> swallowed from elsewhere via any linkage to SIMBAD, but just the new
              >>> work done, whether revisions or completely new.
              >>>
              >>> VSX has and will continue to fail in what was considered a strongly
              >>> desired primary remit by many here, and also in the objective
              >>> context
              >>> of relevance. Bunging together a lot of catalogues willy nilly
              >>> simply
              >>> isn't a sufficient raison d'etre.
              >>>
              >>> It simply fails in terms of relevance, based on connectivity,
              >>> whereas
              >>> OEJV simply does not, no matter what the qualities of either are.
              >>> It's up to the author of a paper to ensure that whomever alights on
              >>> that work finds it meaningful and/or useful, it's no real reflection
              >>> on the venue used (within reasonable limits, that is).
              >>>
              >>> John
              >>>
              >>>
              >>>
              >>>
              >>> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------
              >>> ~-->
              >>> Check out the new improvements in Yahoo! Groups email.
              >>> http://us.click.yahoo.com/4It09A/fOaOAA/yQLSAA/d_XolB/TM
              >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
              >>> ~->
              >>>
              >>>
              >>> Yahoo! Groups Links
              >>>
              >>>
              >>>
              >>
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------
              > ~-->
              > Great things are happening at Yahoo! Groups. See the new email
              > design.
              > http://us.click.yahoo.com/lOt0.A/hOaOAA/yQLSAA/d_XolB/TM
              > --------------------------------------------------------------------
              > ~->
              >
              >
              > Yahoo! Groups Links
              >
              >
              >
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.