Re: (IAAC) Thoughts on Data Sources

>Here is my quick thought on object names.  I would recommend that
>the name given on Uranometria be the name given first in the log.

That will definitely work for me, Steve! However, we're a fairly loose,
email-based community of observers, so I'm loathe to force ANY kind of
formatting onto other people (aside from mentioning *object and instrument*
in the Subject line, and describing *sky conditions* in your post!! :>)

But I do HIGHLY recommend some guidelines (and I think Sue, Owen, Steve and
others will agree - but let me know if not!):

1) Always give the Constellation in your log; if there's confusion about
IDs, this may clear it up. And it's very convenient for your readers!

2) Put RA and Dec if at all convenient - for the same reasons as (1).

3) For the same reasons (AND for fun), give any Common Names you've heard
for the object... I always give "real" names (like "Crab Nebula"), and
occasionally like to dream names up too (like "Shoebuckle Cluster" M35,
"Dogspot Cluster" M41, or my favorite "Bear Scat Galaxy" M106! ;>)

4) If the object is a Messier, always give AT LEAST its M #. There are a
FEW cases where this may not be enough, though! (E.g., M24, M102)

5) If the object is NGC but not Messier, always give AT LEAST its NGC #.

6) If an IC but not a Messier or NGC, give AT LEAST its IC #.

7) If a UGC but not an M, IC, or NGC, give AT LEAST its UGC #.

8) Otherwise, give as many designations as you conveniently can (PK, PN G,
ESO, Abell, Zwicky, MCG, V-V, Sharpless, Cederberg, yadda yadda yadda).

9) If you aren't SURE of an identification, call the object "anonymous(?)"
and try to give a VERY ACCURATE position estimate. (I've done this only

That's MY 2 pesos for the day! :)

Clear skies,