RE: (IAAC) Obj: Basel 11B - Inst: 10" f/6 Newt

	Good.  That means I chose the right spelling for an article I used it in.  I 
checked the Russian Astronomical Journal hoping that its translator was most 
likely to have it correct.
	Here's one I am currently trying to puzzle out.  I've got an article in to 
S&T on Hercules.  It includes the carbon poor planetary DoDz 1 which in the 
professional litterature is referred to as DDDM-1 or DdDm-1 (all three being 
abbreviations for Dolidze-Dzimselejsvili).  I just got my Megastar 4.0 
upgrade, and DoDz 1 is no longer plotted as a planetary in Hercules, but 
instead as an open cluster in Aries.  The planetary in Hercules now has the 
label PNG61.9+41.3.  Perhaps someone decided that the DoDz 1 designation was 
incorrectly applied to the planetary.  After all, most DoDz objects are OCs.  
But since there is a lot of litterature out there calling this planetary 
DDDM-1, it seems awkward to change it. Which object should really bear this 
designation?  Are they both going to share the same designation?  
						Clear skies,  Sue

From: 	owner-netastrocatalog-announce@latrade.com on behalf of Randy Muller
Sent: 	Thursday, March 12, 1998 7:15 PM
To: 	netastrocatalog-announce@latrade.com
Subject: 	Re: (IAAC) Obj: Basel 11B - Inst: 10" f/6 Newt

Sue & Alan French wrote:

> Barkhatova/Barhatova is really supposed to be in the Cyrillic alphabet
> - so what do you do?  Sue

Use standard transliteration rules.  According to such, 'Barkhatova' is
right, and 'Barhatova' is wrong.  'kh' is the standard English
transliteration of the letter in Cyrillic that looks like 'x', from the
Greek letter chi.  'h' is not a standard English transliteration of any
Cyrillic letter.