This site may be down for up to an hour for network maintenance during the period
21 January 2022 22:30 UTC - 22 January 2022 00:30 UTC.

Difference between revisions of "Talk:PRS Small Bodies Facets"

From The SBN Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 3: Line 3:
  
 
We have a facet for dust studies, which is appropriate.  Should there be "gas studies" ? [msk]
 
We have a facet for dust studies, which is appropriate.  Should there be "gas studies" ? [msk]
 +
 +
[AR] Don't know if this helps, but for "dust studies" we have a fair number of data sets with a target of "Dust" and measurements that are called things like "mass spectra", "time of flight spectra", "spatial distribution", and such.  I don't know of anything analogous for gas.  Are there such data sets, and if so how do they describe themselves now in terms of target and observation type?
  
  
Line 8: Line 10:
  
 
My guess is that studies of surfaces (reflectance, gelogical maps) and interiors (seismology, excavation, models) belong to physical properties, and we may want to add something to that effect before "etc."  However, are we OK with atmospheric studies (e.g., of KBOs) being categorized with the atmospheres discipline? [msk]
 
My guess is that studies of surfaces (reflectance, gelogical maps) and interiors (seismology, excavation, models) belong to physical properties, and we may want to add something to that effect before "etc."  However, are we OK with atmospheric studies (e.g., of KBOs) being categorized with the atmospheres discipline? [msk]
 +
 +
[AR] Atmospheres has one of the simplest facet lists - just one facet, with just two values "structure" and "meteorology".  Now, part of this is that they're dragging feet, but looking at the sort of data on the Atmospheres website, would you expect similar data products for KBOs?  If so, then the Atmospheres facets will work.  If you think the sort of results we might get would be substantially different, then we either sweep it up under small bodies or coordinate with Atmospheres on their facet lists.  They're a bit preoccupied with MAVEN at the moment, but I suspect a reasonable proposal would be accepted.

Revision as of 15:19, 19 September 2013

Dust studies. What about gas?

We have a facet for dust studies, which is appropriate. Should there be "gas studies" ? [msk]

[AR] Don't know if this helps, but for "dust studies" we have a fair number of data sets with a target of "Dust" and measurements that are called things like "mass spectra", "time of flight spectra", "spatial distribution", and such. I don't know of anything analogous for gas. Are there such data sets, and if so how do they describe themselves now in terms of target and observation type?


Surfaces, interiors, and atmospheres

My guess is that studies of surfaces (reflectance, gelogical maps) and interiors (seismology, excavation, models) belong to physical properties, and we may want to add something to that effect before "etc." However, are we OK with atmospheric studies (e.g., of KBOs) being categorized with the atmospheres discipline? [msk]

[AR] Atmospheres has one of the simplest facet lists - just one facet, with just two values "structure" and "meteorology". Now, part of this is that they're dragging feet, but looking at the sort of data on the Atmospheres website, would you expect similar data products for KBOs? If so, then the Atmospheres facets will work. If you think the sort of results we might get would be substantially different, then we either sweep it up under small bodies or coordinate with Atmospheres on their facet lists. They're a bit preoccupied with MAVEN at the moment, but I suspect a reasonable proposal would be accepted.