Re: GSC 3493-1324 -- what's next?

[Arne Henden <aah@nofs.navy.mil>]

Ok, I take it back - I was too pessimistic to Michael K.
I was just about ready to mention the new features of IBVS,
but Dirk beat me to it. :-)
   My original comments were regarding traditional IBVS submissions,
where you are the only author for a single article.  They no
longer permit that if you are just submitting photometry without
analysis.  I agree that the "new discoveries" and "new observations"
composite articles (xx00 and xx99 respectively) solve most of
the problems.  I still do not quite understand how you reference
these two composite articles though.
Arne

Dirk Terrell wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Jun 2004 10:17:18 -0500, Michael Koppelman wrote:
> 
> 
>>I don't get why that is good. The IBVS should publish every new "just 
>>another variable" so it get referenced in SIMBAD and becomes part of 
>>the big, bad database. 
> 
> 
> They _do_. It's their "New Discoveries" issue that they publish every
> 100 issues. See
> 
> http://www.konkoly.hu/IBVS/issues.html
> 
> and follow the "Reports on new discoveries" link. Also check out the
> recent editorial note
> 
> http://www.konkoly.hu/IBVS/ednote2004.html
> 
> I think they've taken the right approach. It's good for us because
> valuable data get published and it doesn't overwhelm their limited
> resources.
> 
> Dirk
> 
> 
> 
> 
>