Re: How do I do the following in OW
Oh, i forgot another use case...
3. the path for the event changes and users have to come up with another location.
|
Re: How do I do the following in OW
Hristo,
I wrote my reasons for the feature, but then I realized I had more possible use cases, so let me simplify.
1. I first like to pick the events that I most likely will observe just to have them in "my events". location at that time doesn't matter, so I use my home site as default. I almost always change the location later on, because of chord conflicts with other observers, the site i found on the map doesn't hold up once I do a site survey, or in a recent case, I found a site that would allow me to observe two events in the same night from the same location.
2. observers who have multiple stations will need to modify locations a lot more often for some of the reasons I mention above.?
I thought about adding another station to the new location, then deleting the old station. that doesn't work since you can only cancel ALL stations, not selective ones. THIS is even a bigger issue for those who juggle multi observing site events. Forcing them to start all over seems onerous.?
so, how about a compromise. allow observers to cancel individual stations (right click and select "Manage Stations" rather than "Cancel all Stations" , and then bring up a sub menu with the list of stations with the description "Cancel station X".? you can have a "cancel all" in that menu context. I can live with that!
So my new use case would be to add another station, set a new site to that station, then delete the old station.?
Would anyone else find this useful?
Vince
|
Re: How do I do the following in OW
Hi Vince,
This is not supported at the moment and you'll need to cancel your first station in order to announce another one.
None has asked for something like this before, so I was also curious about your practical use case. If it is something that may be more common, I may find time to extend the current functionality to support it.
Hristo.
On Sunday, July 18, 2021, 12:16:36 PM GMT+10, V Sempronio <vastronomy@...> wrote:
I'm sorry if I didn't explain it clearly enough.
This involves a single event. I initially added it to my events and selected a site off the right click menu. that worked fine. Now I wish to change the site for that event to another site that I have already stored.?Without cancelling the event, how to change the location WITHOUT using the edit the map feature (because it doesn't seem to support selecting another prestored site).
V
|
Re: How do I do the following in OW
I'm sorry if I didn't explain it clearly enough.
This involves a single event. I initially added it to my events and selected a site off the right click menu. that worked fine. Now I wish to change the site for that event to another site that I have already stored.?Without cancelling the event, how to change the location WITHOUT using the edit the map feature (because it doesn't seem to support selecting another prestored site).
V
|
Re: How do I do the following in OW
Hi Vince,
I am not quite sure I understand your use case. Do you have two permanent locations but you would ever only observe from one of them at the same time?
If you have signed up for an even from 1 location, and want to sign up for the same event from another location:
?- If you just deciced to observe from your second site instead of the first site and you don't want to enter your coordinates manually, then your best choice is to cancel and add from the other site. This will only send emails if you have changed your plans in the last 3 days before the event. If this is the case I think this doesn't really fall into 'unwanted correspondence' category but rather in the 'weanted' ones as people will want to know if you have changed plans before the event so they can change accordingly, too.
- Also if the same event it visible from both sites, are those just two stationary telescopes in the same backyard or at they separated by much longer distance and it was jus tacidental that the same event was visible from 2 different sites?
Cheers, Hristo.
On Sunday, July 18, 2021, 4:31:33 AM GMT+10, V Sempronio <vastronomy@...> wrote:
if anyone saw my last thread (before I deleted it), ignore it, it was user error.
I do have a question about best practices in OW.?
If I am going to observe from a location other than my currently set location, and the site is not in my list of stored sites, I first create a new site at the location where I wish to observe from.
I then right click on an event and select "add to my events" and select the site from my list.
This works fine.
Without cancelling the event, how to do I set the site location to yet another location?
I tried doing it from the map by clicking on the icon and selecting edit, but that doesn't give me what I want to do, which is to select another site from my stored list of sites. I don't want to cancel and add it again since that generates unwanted correspondences to others.
I cancelling and re-adding my only option?
Vince
|
How do I do the following in OW
if anyone saw my last thread (before I deleted it), ignore it, it was user error.
I do have a question about best practices in OW.?
If I am going to observe from a location other than my currently set location, and the site is not in my list of stored sites, I first create a new site at the location where I wish to observe from.
I then right click on an event and select "add to my events" and select the site from my list.
This works fine.
Without cancelling the event, how to do I set the site location to yet another location?
I tried doing it from the map by clicking on the icon and selecting edit, but that doesn't give me what I want to do, which is to select another site from my stored list of sites. I don't want to cancel and add it again since that generates unwanted correspondences to others.
I cancelling and re-adding my only option?
Vince
|
Re: IOTA global OWC event tagging criteria
Hristo, ? When running my personal predictions in Occult4, here are the filters that I use to reduce the size of the list of events produced by Occult4: 
Once a list is generated, it is further screened by local site parameters:  ? So, the above list of filters could be applied in OWC and site-specific criteria would be applied by OW.? Once I get this list localized for my site in OW, I then parse through the list for events that can be readily observed with my equipment (12-inch LX200 GPS, f3.3 FR, WAT910HX).? A key criterion I use to parse the list is the tradeoff of mag drop and duration.? Higher mag drop events can allow the observer to isolate shorter duration events in the light curve.? Smaller mag drops [0.5 or less] require relatively longer durations to separate the event from noise.? Here is the rule-of-thumb that I use: Event Duration (seconds) = 1/mag drop ? In order to use the above rule-of-thumb, I must set my exposure time, so the star is continuously visible on screen without major dropouts.? Once I know this for my telescope, I can then estimate the shortest duration event that I can see with my equipment. ? For example, I can see 13 magnitude stars readily using 2x or 4x settings, depending on sky transparency.? Let¡¯s say I need to use 4x, or 0.067 second exposure.? Then, let¡¯s say that I want at least three consecutive exposures to confirm the event.? That means I need an event duration of 0.2 seconds.? Using my rule-of-thumb, I can record an event if the predicted mag drop is 1/0.2 = 5.? If I had a larger telescope, I could use shorter exposures for the same mag drop.? If I have a smaller telescope, I will need longer predicted event times for the same mag drop.? ? I think such a system as described above could be automated.? I think it can be used without reference to SNR since I have set an initial criterion that the exposure setting must be set such that the star is continuously visible.? Such a criteria establishes a consistent SNR for the specific observer¡¯s equipment without specifying a SNR numerically. ? Tony George Scottsdale, AZ ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of hristo_dpavlov via groups.io
Sent: Sunday, July 11, 2021 9:18 PM
To: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: [OccultWatcher] IOTA global OWC event tagging criteria? In light of Tony's last email I would like to open this very important discussion of defining the filters to be used for automatic tagging of events by OWC to be made available in OW. Because OWC has all events on a global scale and because OW does filtering based on a distance, the distance from a location or the geographical region will not be part of the tagging criteria/filter. I will be interested to learn what everyone is using for their own filtering in regards to magnitude, mag drop, duration, but here is my current idea. I see the filter to have three separate components we need to discuss and agree on. 1) Quality: The first component determines the quality of the event and may include stuff like max error bars, min diameter, min rank, min SNR etc. We need to agree on what is worth for high quality events and I think that previous experience from Steve Preston's selection algorithm as well as everyone elses experience from generating Personal Predictions or feeds, will help here. 2) Viability: The second component determines constraints related to min duration, mag drop and integration rate (exposure) to achieve the min SNR defined in the Quality constraint i.e. to obtain meaningful recording. We should be able to determine from past observations what those are and create a table that I can use for applying the filter based on max duration, mag drop and min exposure. 3) Accesibility: The third component will be different for different observers and will laregly depend on the telescope aperture and how dark is their sky. I imagine that there will be different tags for different levels of accesibility. I thought I will base this purely on telescope aperture, for example the tags can be Aperture8, Aperture10, Aperture12, Aperture14, Aperture16, Aperture20, Aperture24 where each number repeserents the aperture in inches and assumes a limiting sky magnutude of 5. Then everyone can pick the tag that applies to them, which is not necessaryly the tag for their aperture as it will also depend on the limiting magnitude for their sky condition. The idea however is that thi sis something easy to understand as a tag ApertureXY would mean that this event will be assesible with a telescpe with aperture of XY inches with limiting magnitude of 5. I may have a smaller telescope and darker sky and will then choose the tag that best applies for what I have assess to. So the first big question which deserves a good discussion is what Quality of events we want to be automatically tagged. Considering that there are 30 million events in OWC and noone will be interested in all of them, it is important to agree on what constitutes a good quality event for the majority of the users/observers that is worth observing regardless of other factors (such as potential moons, rings, etc scientific interest). Events with more specilised scientific interest will be tagged aditionally and separately as already done for LuckyStar and other campaigns. Those who want more than just the average recommended events and the active campaigns would be abel to do more specialized searches in the OWC database to satisfy their desires. Not sure exactly how this is going to work yet, but these types of events are outside of the Quality criteria I am trying to get defined here for the global OWC tagging of events. Also worth mentioning that these global events might be seen as an extension to and a replacement of the current IOTA Occultation events. The idea is that at some point Steve Preston will stop publishing his events and OWC would become the source of those events. IOTA Occultations may still list events but tagging will be done on OWC and predictions will come from OWC as well. So let me what you think about all this.
|
Re: IOTA global OWC event tagging criteria
¡°What I was refering to is that the important parameters (whch you listed as: star mag, mag drop, and event duration) can be derived from a pre-agreed SNR for a high quality
events.¡±
Yes, I did expect this is what you intended. ?But I am concerned about using SNR as a method of evaluating the quality of an event.? First, occultations must be evaluated as a light curve rather than a single photometric measures.? ?SNR
doesn¡¯t carry enough information to determine the reliability of an event detection.? The event duration and mag drop are critical factors as well.? A low SNR event can yield a reliable detection if the event is very long or the mag drop very large.? My second
concern is just a personal preference.? I prefer to define ¡°soft¡± boundaries for these filters ¨C to allow for differences in how observers make the trade-off between the various parameters of an occultation.? For example, some people might be more willing
to chase a short duration event.? So I prefer to setup filters which will include ¡°too many¡± events rather than too few.? In general, I favor an approach that recognizes the complexity of these events and the variations in how observers approach the decision.?
Yes, we could start with SNR and derive a filtering algorithm from the various event attributes.? But I am concerned it won¡¯t work for some people.? If you like the idea of working on an SNR algorithm, that is great.? But, to the extent that it matters, I
don¡¯t see much benefit in this approach and would only use the basic event criteria.? Based on my past experience, basic event criteria have always been sufficient.
?
¡°Unfortunately these are all location related parameters and cannot be applied at OWC level for tagging. Along the path of the same event observers will have different star
altitudes and twilight. So again OW will be doing the filtering for this.
¡±
My mistake. You are correct about the location dependence for these attributes.? But it could be useful to include ¡°maximum star altitude¡±.? I often cull events because the star is low altitude everywhere along the path.
?
Thanks
Steve
|
Re: IOTA global OWC event tagging criteria
Hi Steve,
A couple of comments.
When I said that tagging will not be linked to regions I meant only for the automated global tagging which will be the extension of IOTA Occultations. People can still tag events with local tags if they pick a sub-selection of the global events for a regional feed/tag. Because one event can be tagged with multiple tags, this is not going to be an issue. In those instances the local tag can be used as a first level of filtering criteria i.e. someone interested in handpicked events in their region. OW will still apply further filtering on the top of that.
> For OWC, I would add star altitude, twilight conditions (combination of sun altitude and
the distance from the sun), and time since nautical twilight (for multi-station deployments)
Unfortunately these are all location related parameters and cannot be applied at OWC level for tagging. Along the path of the same event observers will have different star altitudes and twilight. So again OW will be doing the filtering for this.
In regards to SNR. This will not be available during the actual filtering process in OWC and cannot be used directly for filtering/tagging. What I was refering to is that the important parameters (whch you listed as: star mag, mag drop, and event duration) can be derived from a pre-agreed SNR for a high quality events. Then the three magnitude, drop and duration parameters can be derived from the fixed SNR and for one of the more sentive and low noise cameras available to amateurs. While this will not be a perfect crieteria, there is no intention for it to be perfect. I see it as using a more systematic approach to filter out events for which satisfactory SNR could not be achieved even with the better integrating cameras available to amateurs. In the end OW will still filter our some or even many of those events based on the observer's OW filter choices for magnitude, duration etc.
So I think that agreeing on a meaningful SNR for a successful occultation is an important step forward that we need to take. In classical photometry sense I think that SNR of 3 is considered an rough minimum for an acceptable quality photometric measurement. May be we can try starting at SNR of 3 and try to find evidence in both ways to see if this value should be lowered or increased.
Hopefully this explains better what I mean by SNR being part of our theoretical approach to global event tagging in OWC.
Cheers.
Hristo
On Tuesday, July 13, 2021, 9:09:17 AM GMT+10, Steve Preston via groups.io <stevepr@...> wrote:
Hristo said:
¡°Because OWC has all events on a global scale and because OW does filtering based on a distance, the distance from a location or the geographical region will not be part
of the tagging criteria/filter.¡±
?
Everyone should note what Hristo has said here.? When tagging events, you cannot filter the events by location (either distance from a location or by a region).? This limitation represents a major change for many of the current feeds.?
Many of the current feeds are based on a region (e.g. NALowMag for North American low mag drop events).? I¡¯m not saying this limitation is problem, but it is different from the approach with Occult.? With OWC, ¡°feed generators¡± will only tag events for the
entire world, not their region.? Afterward, observers will use distance filtering to see the tagged events near them.
?
Filtering Criteria:
Many years ago David Dunham and I worked out a set of criteria for prioritizing (and filtering events). ?The key elements were the path uncertainty, star mag, mag drop, and event duration. ?One could easily divide this into two factors:
path certainty and ¡°observability¡±.? The star mag, mag drop, and event duration are all key factors in determining the difficulty in observing an event (observability).? For OWC, I would add star altitude, twilight conditions (combination of sun altitude and
the distance from the sun), and time since nautical twilight (for multi-station deployments).
?
SNR/Viability:
I strongly recommend that we avoid trying to use SNR as a filtering criteria.? The SNR of recording is based on too many factors which are hard to predict or will be changing over time.? Atmospheric conditions (e.g. humidity, clouds, seeing
conditions) vary considerably over regions and time (and have a large impact on SNR).? Cameras and recording systems have a huge impact.? ?Star magnitudes are variable and not precisely matched to the instrumental response curves of our cameras ¨C which leads
to concerns over precision.? Observers already use a variety of camera/recording configurations and more will appear in the near future.? Although OWC can deal with this complexity, it will require a LOT of work to maintain an accurate set of guidelines for
OWC which covers all of these combinations.? And, finally, I suspect the question of ¡°min SNR¡± is not an easy question to determine.
?
Given all the complexities of trying to use SNR, I recommend that we only use broad guidelines based on aperture and a nominal set of equipment ¨C this sounds like Hristo¡¯s ¡°Accessibility¡± category.?
Steve
|
Re: IOTA global OWC event tagging criteria
Hi all, ? My two cents worth: ? - Quality
? I would suggest a combination of path certainty (probably already calculated in the rank?) and diameter, combined with fuzzy logic (rather the setting mininum thresholds for the individual components going in to the Quality calculation). I don¡¯t think the time uncertainty in the prediction is critical (compared to the path uncertainty), as the observer simply needs to measure for a sufficient time before and after the predicted time. ? - Viability
? Again, a fuzzy logic combination of duration and mag drop. I think as the integration rate depends strongly on the individual scope¡¯s aperture, this should be in the Accessibility calculation. ? - Accessibility
? All the stuff relating to an individual observer and their location: Scope aperture, limiting magnitude (presumably as seen by a naked eye ¨C which is closer to 4 for me due to my proximity to Wellington), proximity of the Sun and moon, phase of the moon, altitude of the event. This is also where the integration time can be combined with the scope aperture and compared with the event duration to calculate the number of measurements that will be made during the occultation (as a general rule, we like to see three points during an occultation to be confident the drop isn¡¯t due to random noise). I wouldn¡¯t be surprised if it turns out we need to plot the Accessibility metric against the integration rate to find an optimum integration rate. ? Cheers, Murray. ? Sent from for Windows 10 ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: hristo_dpavlov via groups.ioSent: Monday, 12 July 2021 4:18 p.m. To: [email protected]; [email protected]Subject: [OccultWatcher] IOTA global OWC event tagging criteria ? In light of Tony's last email I would like to open this very important discussion of defining the filters to be used for automatic tagging of events by OWC to be made available in OW. Because OWC has all events on a global scale and because OW does filtering based on a distance, the distance from a location or the geographical region will not be part of the tagging criteria/filter. I will be interested to learn what everyone is using for their own filtering in regards to magnitude, mag drop, duration, but here is my current idea. I see the filter to have three separate components we need to discuss and agree on. 1) Quality: The first component determines the quality of the event and may include stuff like max error bars, min diameter, min rank, min SNR etc. We need to agree on what is worth for high quality events and I think that previous experience from Steve Preston's selection algorithm as well as everyone elses experience from generating Personal Predictions or feeds, will help here. 2) Viability: The second component determines constraints related to min duration, mag drop and integration rate (exposure) to achieve the min SNR defined in the Quality constraint i.e. to obtain meaningful recording. We should be able to determine from past observations what those are and create a table that I can use for applying the filter based on max duration, mag drop and min exposure. 3) Accesibility: The third component will be different for different observers and will laregly depend on the telescope aperture and how dark is their sky. I imagine that there will be different tags for different levels of accesibility. I thought I will base this purely on telescope aperture, for example the tags can be Aperture8, Aperture10, Aperture12, Aperture14, Aperture16, Aperture20, Aperture24 where each number repeserents the aperture in inches and assumes a limiting sky magnutude of 5. Then everyone can pick the tag that applies to them, which is not necessaryly the tag for their aperture as it will also depend on the limiting magnitude for their sky condition. The idea however is that thi sis something easy to understand as a tag ApertureXY would mean that this event will be assesible with a telescpe with aperture of XY inches with limiting magnitude of 5. I may have a smaller telescope and darker sky and will then choose the tag that best applies for what I have assess to. So the first big question which deserves a good discussion is what Quality of events we want to be automatically tagged. Considering that there are 30 million events in OWC and noone will be interested in all of them, it is important to agree on what constitutes a good quality event for the majority of the users/observers that is worth observing regardless of other factors (such as potential moons, rings, etc scientific interest). Events with more specilised scientific interest will be tagged aditionally and separately as already done for LuckyStar and other campaigns. Those who want more than just the average recommended events and the active campaigns would be abel to do more specialized searches in the OWC database to satisfy their desires. Not sure exactly how this is going to work yet, but these types of events are outside of the Quality criteria I am trying to get defined here for the global OWC tagging of events. Also worth mentioning that these global events might be seen as an extension to and a replacement of the current IOTA Occultation events. The idea is that at some point Steve Preston will stop publishing his events and OWC would become the source of those events. IOTA Occultations may still list events but tagging will be done on OWC and predictions will come from OWC as well. So let me what you think about all this.
|
Re: IOTA global OWC event tagging criteria
Hristo said:
¡°Because OWC has all events on a global scale and because OW does filtering based on a distance, the distance from a location or the geographical region will not be part
of the tagging criteria/filter.¡±
?
Everyone should note what Hristo has said here.? When tagging events, you cannot filter the events by location (either distance from a location or by a region).? This limitation represents a major change for many of the current feeds.?
Many of the current feeds are based on a region (e.g. NALowMag for North American low mag drop events).? I¡¯m not saying this limitation is problem, but it is different from the approach with Occult.? With OWC, ¡°feed generators¡± will only tag events for the
entire world, not their region.? Afterward, observers will use distance filtering to see the tagged events near them.
?
Filtering Criteria:
Many years ago David Dunham and I worked out a set of criteria for prioritizing (and filtering events). ?The key elements were the path uncertainty, star mag, mag drop, and event duration. ?One could easily divide this into two factors:
path certainty and ¡°observability¡±.? The star mag, mag drop, and event duration are all key factors in determining the difficulty in observing an event (observability).? For OWC, I would add star altitude, twilight conditions (combination of sun altitude and
the distance from the sun), and time since nautical twilight (for multi-station deployments).
?
SNR/Viability:
I strongly recommend that we avoid trying to use SNR as a filtering criteria.? The SNR of recording is based on too many factors which are hard to predict or will be changing over time.? Atmospheric conditions (e.g. humidity, clouds, seeing
conditions) vary considerably over regions and time (and have a large impact on SNR).? Cameras and recording systems have a huge impact.? ?Star magnitudes are variable and not precisely matched to the instrumental response curves of our cameras ¨C which leads
to concerns over precision.? Observers already use a variety of camera/recording configurations and more will appear in the near future.? Although OWC can deal with this complexity, it will require a LOT of work to maintain an accurate set of guidelines for
OWC which covers all of these combinations.? And, finally, I suspect the question of ¡°min SNR¡± is not an easy question to determine.
?
Given all the complexities of trying to use SNR, I recommend that we only use broad guidelines based on aperture and a nominal set of equipment ¨C this sounds like Hristo¡¯s ¡°Accessibility¡± category.?
?
Steve
|
IOTA global OWC event tagging criteria
Hi all,
In light of Tony's last email I would like to open this very important discussion of defining the filters to be used for automatic tagging of events by OWC to be made available in OW.
Because OWC has all events on a global scale and because OW does filtering based on a distance, the distance from a location or the geographical region will not be part of the tagging criteria/filter.
I will be interested to learn what everyone is using for their own filtering in regards to magnitude, mag drop, duration, but here is my current idea. I see the filter to have three separate components we need to discuss and agree on.
1) Quality: The first component determines the quality of the event and may include stuff like max error bars, min diameter, min rank, min SNR etc. We need to agree on what is worth for high quality events and I think that previous experience from Steve Preston's selection algorithm as well as everyone elses experience from generating Personal Predictions or feeds, will help here.
2) Viability: The second component determines constraints related to min duration, mag drop and integration rate (exposure) to achieve the min SNR defined in the Quality constraint i.e. to obtain meaningful recording. We should be able to determine from past observations what those are and create a table that I can use for applying the filter based on max duration, mag drop and min exposure.
3) Accesibility: The third component will be different for different observers and will laregly depend on the telescope aperture and how dark is their sky. I imagine that there will be different tags for different levels of accesibility. I thought I will base this purely on telescope aperture, for example the tags can be Aperture8, Aperture10, Aperture12, Aperture14, Aperture16, Aperture20, Aperture24 where each number repeserents the aperture in inches and assumes a limiting sky magnutude of 5. Then everyone can pick the tag that applies to them, which is not necessaryly the tag for their aperture as it will also depend on the limiting magnitude for their sky condition. The idea however is that thi sis something easy to understand as a tag ApertureXY would mean that this event will be assesible with a telescpe with aperture of XY inches with limiting magnitude of 5. I may have a smaller telescope and darker sky and will then choose the tag that best applies for what I have assess to.
So the first big question which deserves a good discussion is what Quality of events we want to be automatically tagged. Considering that there are 30 million events in OWC and noone will be interested in all of them, it is important to agree on what constitutes a good quality event for the majority of the users/observers that is worth observing regardless of other factors (such as potential moons, rings, etc scientific interest). Events with more specilised scientific interest will be tagged aditionally and separately as already done for LuckyStar and other campaigns.
Those who want more than just the average recommended events and the active campaigns would be abel to do more specialized searches in the OWC database to satisfy their desires. Not sure exactly how this is going to work yet, but these types of events are outside of the Quality criteria I am trying to get defined here for the global OWC tagging of events.
Also worth mentioning that these global events might be seen as an extension to and a replacement of the current IOTA Occultation events. The idea is that at some point Steve Preston will stop publishing his events and OWC would become the source of those events. IOTA Occultations may still list events but tagging will be done on OWC and predictions will come from OWC as well.
So let me what you think about all this.
Cheers,
Hristo.
|
Re: Future of OW Personal Predictions and OWC
Hristo, ? Yes, it makes sense.? Hopefully, you will be able to program OWC with the ability to screen events and tag them with the same types of filters that are currently available in Occult4.? If you need a list of filters as a template, I can provide a list of typical filters that I use.? I imagine that others might use similar filters and/or you might put out request for filters that people desire to use. ? Best regards, ? Tony George Scottsdale, AZ ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of hristo_dpavlov via groups.io
Sent: Sunday, July 11, 2021 5:14 PM
To: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [OccultWatcher] Future of OW Personal Predictions and OWC? > So, for now, my suggestion still appears to be valid and I hope that you will consider it in the larger scheme of things.? I find it quite easy to generate a list of events for my home site, > with all the filters allowed by Occult4, it is easy and convenient.? Then, if I create a planned event, it would be handy if OW would compare that event to events stored in OWC and if > there is a match, to use the best prediction to alert others in my vicinity of my planned event The way imagine this to be working in the long run is as follows: - You will not need to generate your own predictions because *ALL* predictions for events involving numbered asteroids in the next 2 months will be on OWC - Instead of getting your Personal Predictions in your OW so you can annonce, you will be getting them from OWC during synchronisation (after having subscribed for the corresponding tags) - Once you have announced your intentions to observe, the events you have dont this for, will still be available in the 'Planned Observations' feed for everyone else the way it works today (without tag subscription). - If anyone wants to publish predictions not in OWC they will be more than welcome to do that, but not as Personal Predictions, rather via OWC tagging system with appropriate tag that descibes the nature of the events they are publishing. So I am not planning on removing the Planned Observations "feed" as I think it is very valuable. I am also hoping that people will continue to want to publish/tag other predictions on OWC but this wil be now done not via Personal Predictions from OW but will be done from OWC's web site using the tagging system. In the end if everything works well people will just naturally stop generating Personal Predictions as they could find the events in OWC *or* they will start maintaining a tag on OWC. Hope this makes more sense. On Monday, July 12, 2021, 2:53:51 AM GMT+10, TriAstro <triastro@...> wrote: Hristo, ? Thanks for the extensive explanation.? Now it all makes more sense.? OWC is still a major work in progress.? Only a select few have access to Tagging.? Those of us that generate our own personal predictions can still do so ¨C at leas for a while.? The display of Planned occultations in OW is still being considered. ? So, for now, my suggestion still appears to be valid and I hope that you will consider it in the larger scheme of things.? I find it quite easy to generate a list of events for my home site, with all the filters allowed by Occult4, it is easy and convenient.? Then, if I create a planned event, it would be handy if OW would compare that event to events stored in OWC and if there is a match, to use the best prediction to alert others in my vicinity of my planned event. ? Best regards, ? Tony George Scottsdale, AZ ? ? I will try to explain more about OWC and how it functions at the IOTA meeting. 'Planned Event' doesn't really fall into the idea of tags as this does not explain *why* someone has decided to observe it in first place, but there is also more to it. Also if everything functions OWC will always have all predictions that currently anyone could decide to publish as Personal and will also have a better (or qually good in the worst case) prediction based on JPL elements. OWC will also have eventually other non JPL based predictions as well that can be used for comparison. Based on this everything that someone currently may want to publish as a Personal prediction sould be already on OWC and a better prediction will be available there, too. So the only issue is how those events get tagged so they become visible to OW users. I would like to solve this problem first and if it is solved well there will be no need for 'Personal' predictions to be shared any longer. This is why I decided not to disrupt all people publishing Personal Predictions (as initially planned) as this is currently useful functionality and it is better to see if it can change more naturally. If you are interested to maintain a feed (not just personal predictions) and tag events with your own tag, this is a separare thing. Write to me directly if you are interested in this and I will include you in the first trials when I get to that point. This email probably doesn't answer all of your questions. I wish I could do that in a simple emial but it will take a lot more and a lot longer to explain the whole concept I have in mind. As it is also develping and changing constantly, which also makes it even harder. My best advice is to please give feed back on changes and features that have been already implemented and released as this will help me understand the level of usefulness they provide (or don't) and will better direct my efforts. On Sunday, July 11, 2021, 12:36:40 AM GMT+10, TriAstro <triastro@...> wrote: Hristo, ? I¡¯m not sure I understand your message below about automatic tagging.? Would you mean automatic tagging as a Planned Event?? I am sure that I don¡¯t understand how to make tagging work for me, so one of the reasons why I continue to make my own personal predictions.? Here is a suggestion: ? For those of us who continue to make our own personal predictions, if we post them to OW as an event we intend to observe, let OW upload it to the OWC and compare against your OWC predictions.? If there is a match, then post (tag?) your OWC prediction as a Planned Observation.? Then others, who rely on localized personal predictions can also have the benefit of both the localized prediction and OWC? ? Thanks for all the work you do. ? Tony George Scottsdale, AZ ? ? After further thoughts I decided to postpone the changes to Personal Predictions. I would like to first implement automatic tagging on OWC which could automatically publish all events that are usually published as personal predictions. If this is the case then the use of Personal Predictions for sharing predictions with others will become unnecessary as those prediction will be already available in OW, or at least this is my thinking at the moment. If there are still more events not tagged automatically by OWC which are published as Personal Predictions then they will form a good case for further review and consideration, but until then I will focus my efforts on different parts of OWC and OW
|
Re: Future of OW Personal Predictions and OWC
Hi Tony,
> So, for now, my suggestion still appears to be valid and I hope that you will consider it in the larger scheme of things.? I
find it quite easy to generate a list of events for my home site,
> with
all the filters allowed by Occult4, it is easy and convenient.? Then,
if I create a planned event, it would be handy if OW would compare that
event to events stored in OWC and if > there is a match, to use the best
prediction to alert others in my vicinity of my planned event
The way imagine this to be working in the long run is as follows:
- You will not need to generate your own predictions because *ALL* predictions for events involving numbered asteroids in the next 2 months will be on OWC - Instead of getting your Personal Predictions in your OW so you can annonce, you will be getting them from OWC during synchronisation (after having subscribed for the corresponding tags)
- Once you have announced your intentions to observe, the events you have dont this for, will still be available in the 'Planned Observations' feed for everyone else the way it works today (without tag subscription). - If anyone wants to publish predictions not in OWC they will be more than welcome to do that, but not as Personal Predictions, rather via OWC tagging system with appropriate tag that descibes the nature of the events they are publishing.
So I am not planning on removing the Planned Observations "feed" as I think it is very valuable. I am also hoping that people will continue to want to publish/tag other predictions on OWC but this wil be now done not via Personal Predictions from OW but will be done from OWC's web site using the tagging system. In the end if everything works well people will just naturally stop generating Personal Predictions as they could find the events in OWC *or* they will start maintaining a tag on OWC.
Hope this makes more sense.
Hristo.
On Monday, July 12, 2021, 2:53:51 AM GMT+10, TriAstro <triastro@...> wrote:
Hristo, ? Thanks for the extensive explanation.? Now it all makes more sense.? OWC is still a major work in progress.? Only a select few have access to Tagging.? Those of us that generate our own personal predictions can still do so ¨C at leas for a while.? The display of Planned occultations in OW is still being considered. ? So, for now, my suggestion still appears to be valid and I hope that you will consider it in the larger scheme of things.? I find it quite easy to generate a list of events for my home site, with all the filters allowed by Occult4, it is easy and convenient.? Then, if I create a planned event, it would be handy if OW would compare that event to events stored in OWC and if there is a match, to use the best prediction to alert others in my vicinity of my planned event. ? Best regards, ? Tony George Scottsdale, AZ ?
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of hristo_dpavlov via groups.io
Sent: Sunday, July 11, 2021 12:26 AM
To: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [OccultWatcher] Future of OW Personal Predictions and OWC ? I will try to explain more about OWC and how it functions at the IOTA meeting. 'Planned Event' doesn't really fall into the idea of tags as this does not explain *why* someone has decided to observe it in first place, but there is also more to it. Also if everything functions OWC will always have all predictions that currently anyone could decide to publish as Personal and will also have a better (or qually good in the worst case) prediction based on JPL elements. OWC will also have eventually other non JPL based predictions as well that can be used for comparison. Based on this everything that someone currently may want to publish as a Personal prediction sould be already on OWC and a better prediction will be available there, too. So the only issue is how those events get tagged so they become visible to OW users. I would like to solve this problem first and if it is solved well there will be no need for 'Personal' predictions to be shared any longer. This is why I decided not to disrupt all people publishing Personal Predictions (as initially planned) as this is currently useful functionality and it is better to see if it can change more naturally. If you are interested to maintain a feed (not just personal predictions) and tag events with your own tag, this is a separare thing. Write to me directly if you are interested in this and I will include you in the first trials when I get to that point. This email probably doesn't answer all of your questions. I wish I could do that in a simple emial but it will take a lot more and a lot longer to explain the whole concept I have in mind. As it is also develping and changing constantly, which also makes it even harder. My best advice is to please give feed back on changes and features that have been already implemented and released as this will help me understand the level of usefulness they provide (or don't) and will better direct my efforts. On Sunday, July 11, 2021, 12:36:40 AM GMT+10, TriAstro <triastro@...> wrote: Hristo, ? I¡¯m not sure I understand your message below about automatic tagging.? Would you mean automatic tagging as a Planned Event?? I am sure that I don¡¯t understand how to make tagging work for me, so one of the reasons why I continue to make my own personal predictions.? Here is a suggestion: ? For those of us who continue to make our own personal predictions, if we post them to OW as an event we intend to observe, let OW upload it to the OWC and compare against your OWC predictions.? If there is a match, then post (tag?) your OWC prediction as a Planned Observation.? Then others, who rely on localized personal predictions can also have the benefit of both the localized prediction and OWC? ? Thanks for all the work you do. ? Tony George Scottsdale, AZ ? ? After further thoughts I decided to postpone the changes to Personal Predictions. I would like to first implement automatic tagging on OWC which could automatically publish all events that are usually published as personal predictions. If this is the case then the use of Personal Predictions for sharing predictions with others will become unnecessary as those prediction will be already available in OW, or at least this is my thinking at the moment. If there are still more events not tagged automatically by OWC which are published as Personal Predictions then they will form a good case for further review and consideration, but until then I will focus my efforts on different parts of OWC and OW
|
Re: Future of OW Personal Predictions and OWC
Hristo, ? Thanks for the extensive explanation.? Now it all makes more sense.? OWC is still a major work in progress.? Only a select few have access to Tagging.? Those of us that generate our own personal predictions can still do so ¨C at leas for a while.? The display of Planned occultations in OW is still being considered. ? So, for now, my suggestion still appears to be valid and I hope that you will consider it in the larger scheme of things.? I find it quite easy to generate a list of events for my home site, with all the filters allowed by Occult4, it is easy and convenient.? Then, if I create a planned event, it would be handy if OW would compare that event to events stored in OWC and if there is a match, to use the best prediction to alert others in my vicinity of my planned event. ? Best regards, ? Tony George Scottsdale, AZ ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of hristo_dpavlov via groups.io
Sent: Sunday, July 11, 2021 12:26 AM
To: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [OccultWatcher] Future of OW Personal Predictions and OWC? I will try to explain more about OWC and how it functions at the IOTA meeting. 'Planned Event' doesn't really fall into the idea of tags as this does not explain *why* someone has decided to observe it in first place, but there is also more to it. Also if everything functions OWC will always have all predictions that currently anyone could decide to publish as Personal and will also have a better (or qually good in the worst case) prediction based on JPL elements. OWC will also have eventually other non JPL based predictions as well that can be used for comparison. Based on this everything that someone currently may want to publish as a Personal prediction sould be already on OWC and a better prediction will be available there, too. So the only issue is how those events get tagged so they become visible to OW users. I would like to solve this problem first and if it is solved well there will be no need for 'Personal' predictions to be shared any longer. This is why I decided not to disrupt all people publishing Personal Predictions (as initially planned) as this is currently useful functionality and it is better to see if it can change more naturally. If you are interested to maintain a feed (not just personal predictions) and tag events with your own tag, this is a separare thing. Write to me directly if you are interested in this and I will include you in the first trials when I get to that point. This email probably doesn't answer all of your questions. I wish I could do that in a simple emial but it will take a lot more and a lot longer to explain the whole concept I have in mind. As it is also develping and changing constantly, which also makes it even harder. My best advice is to please give feed back on changes and features that have been already implemented and released as this will help me understand the level of usefulness they provide (or don't) and will better direct my efforts. On Sunday, July 11, 2021, 12:36:40 AM GMT+10, TriAstro <triastro@...> wrote: Hristo, ? I¡¯m not sure I understand your message below about automatic tagging.? Would you mean automatic tagging as a Planned Event?? I am sure that I don¡¯t understand how to make tagging work for me, so one of the reasons why I continue to make my own personal predictions.? Here is a suggestion: ? For those of us who continue to make our own personal predictions, if we post them to OW as an event we intend to observe, let OW upload it to the OWC and compare against your OWC predictions.? If there is a match, then post (tag?) your OWC prediction as a Planned Observation.? Then others, who rely on localized personal predictions can also have the benefit of both the localized prediction and OWC? ? Thanks for all the work you do. ? Tony George Scottsdale, AZ ? ? After further thoughts I decided to postpone the changes to Personal Predictions. I would like to first implement automatic tagging on OWC which could automatically publish all events that are usually published as personal predictions. If this is the case then the use of Personal Predictions for sharing predictions with others will become unnecessary as those prediction will be already available in OW, or at least this is my thinking at the moment. If there are still more events not tagged automatically by OWC which are published as Personal Predictions then they will form a good case for further review and consideration, but until then I will focus my efforts on different parts of OWC and OW
|
Re: Future of OW Personal Predictions and OWC
Hi Tony,
I will try to explain more about OWC and how it functions at the IOTA meeting. 'Planned Event' doesn't really fall into the idea of tags as this does not explain *why* someone has decided to observe it in first place, but there is also more to it.
Also if everything functions OWC will always have all predictions that currently anyone could decide to publish as Personal and will also have a better (or qually good in the worst case) prediction based on JPL elements. OWC will also have eventually other non JPL based predictions as well that can be used for comparison. Based on this everything that someone currently may want to publish as a Personal prediction sould be already on OWC and a better prediction will be available there, too. So the only issue is how those events get tagged so they become visible to OW users. I would like to solve this problem first and if it is solved well there will be no need for 'Personal' predictions to be shared any longer. This is why I decided not to disrupt all people publishing Personal Predictions (as initially planned) as this is currently useful functionality and it is better to see if it can change more naturally.
If you are interested to maintain a feed (not just personal predictions) and tag events with your own tag, this is a separare thing. Write to me directly if you are interested in this and I will include you in the first trials when I get to that point.
This email probably doesn't answer all of your questions. I wish I could do that in a simple emial but it will take a lot more and a lot longer to explain the whole concept I have in mind. As it is also develping and changing constantly, which also makes it even harder.
My best advice is to please give feed back on changes and features that have been already implemented and released as this will help me understand the level of usefulness they provide (or don't) and will better direct my efforts.
Cheers,
Hristo.
On Sunday, July 11, 2021, 12:36:40 AM GMT+10, TriAstro <triastro@...> wrote:
Hristo, ? I¡¯m not sure I understand your message below about automatic tagging.? Would you mean automatic tagging as a Planned Event?? I am sure that I don¡¯t understand how to make tagging work for me, so one of the reasons why I continue to make my own personal predictions.? Here is a suggestion: ? For those of us who continue to make our own personal predictions, if we post them to OW as an event we intend to observe, let OW upload it to the OWC and compare against your OWC predictions.? If there is a match, then post (tag?) your OWC prediction as a Planned Observation.? Then others, who rely on localized personal predictions can also have the benefit of both the localized prediction and OWC? ? Thanks for all the work you do. ? Tony George Scottsdale, AZ ?
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of hristo_dpavlov via groups.io
Sent: Friday, July 9, 2021 9:59 PM
To: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [OccultWatcher] Future of OW Personal Predictions and OWC ? After further thoughts I decided to postpone the changes to Personal Predictions. I would like to first implement automatic tagging on OWC which could automatically publish all events that are usually published as personal predictions. If this is the case then the use of Personal Predictions for sharing predictions with others will become unnecessary as those prediction will be already available in OW, or at least this is my thinking at the moment. If there are still more events not tagged automatically by OWC which are published as Personal Predictions then they will form a good case for further review and consideration, but until then I will focus my efforts on different parts of OWC and OW
|
Re: Future of OW Personal Predictions and OWC
Hristo, ? I¡¯m not sure I understand your message below about automatic tagging.? Would you mean automatic tagging as a Planned Event?? I am sure that I don¡¯t understand how to make tagging work for me, so one of the reasons why I continue to make my own personal predictions.? Here is a suggestion: ? For those of us who continue to make our own personal predictions, if we post them to OW as an event we intend to observe, let OW upload it to the OWC and compare against your OWC predictions.? If there is a match, then post (tag?) your OWC prediction as a Planned Observation.? Then others, who rely on localized personal predictions can also have the benefit of both the localized prediction and OWC? ? Thanks for all the work you do. ? Tony George Scottsdale, AZ ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of hristo_dpavlov via groups.io
Sent: Friday, July 9, 2021 9:59 PM
To: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [OccultWatcher] Future of OW Personal Predictions and OWC? After further thoughts I decided to postpone the changes to Personal Predictions. I would like to first implement automatic tagging on OWC which could automatically publish all events that are usually published as personal predictions. If this is the case then the use of Personal Predictions for sharing predictions with others will become unnecessary as those prediction will be already available in OW, or at least this is my thinking at the moment. If there are still more events not tagged automatically by OWC which are published as Personal Predictions then they will form a good case for further review and consideration, but until then I will focus my efforts on different parts of OWC and OW
|
Re: Future of OW Personal Predictions and OWC
Hi All,
After further thoughts I decided to postpone the changes to Personal Predictions.
I would like to first implement automatic tagging on OWC which could automatically publish all events that are usually published as personal predictions. If this is the case then the use of Personal Predictions for sharing predictions with others will become unnecessary as those prediction will be already available in OW, or at least this is my thinking at the moment.
If there are still more events not tagged automatically by OWC which are published as Personal Predictions then they will form a good case for further review and consideration, but until then I will focus my efforts on different parts of OWC and OW
Cheers, Hristo
|
Re: Synchronising (NEA) always present
Hi Vin,
There have been issues with the NEA 'feed' in the past. Sometimes people's IP addresses get black listed for a period of time and the feed may not work for weeks. They it can start working suddenly again.
OW appears stuck on the NEA feed because it is unable to complete the data fetching. What it should do instead is show an error of some sort. However neither the user nor I can do something to fix this error and it eventually goes away. So I suggest that you ignore this behaviour.
Hristo.
On Thursday, June 24, 2021, 2:11:08 AM GMT+10, V Sempronio <vastronomy@...> wrote:
This status message is often present at the bottom of the main dialog.?
Is the software always spending that much time on this operation or is it a status message that isn't being cleared?
I tried purging the DB, but it still remains.
Vin
|
Synchronising (NEA) always present
This status message is often present at the bottom of the main dialog.?
Is the software always spending that much time on this operation or is it a status message that isn't being cleared?
I tried purging the DB, but it still remains.
Vin
|
V Sempronio
