From: Selden E Ball Jr <seb@le...> - 2004-10-23 09:39:40
How hard would it be to replace the new STC declarations
by their SSC equivalents?
1) Instead of using the prefixes Barycenter and Star
identify the object types using the Class directive.
(Or are you leaning toward replacing the Class declaration
by equivalent prefixes?)
2) Instead of using the directive OrbitBarycenter, define star and
barycenter relationships using hierarchical paths.
My guess is that #1 would be relatively easy, but that #2 would
be more difficult.
My hope is that this might make it easier to merge the two
types of catalogs at some time in the future so that a complete
system could be defined in just one file.
This also suggests that eventually it might be appropriate
to use similar Class and path declarations for Galaxy, Nebula
and other objects once their orbital motions can be displayed.
Note that this also suggests that it might eventually be reasonable
to be able to define free-flying planets.
(I've been reading the SciAm special issue on stars.
It seems that many planets formed in globular clusters will have
been thrown out of their orbits due to stellar collisions or near
misses. Also, it seems not too unreasonable for planet-sized bodies
to have formed as individual ocndensations
within gas clouds, similar to how brown dwarfs are formed.)