Re: GSC 00445-01993

[Michael Koppelman <lolife@bitstream.net>]

Good idea, Tom. Can I ask Michael Richmond to update Tech Note 84 with the 
latest (and hopefully final) version which is here:

http://www.lolife.com/gsc279-321/

...and then add TN 86 which is here:

http://www.lolife.com/astronomy/gsc445-1993/

The latter is in PDF only but the former is also in TeX if anyone actually 
prefers that.

Thanks!
Michael Koppelman


On Sunday, July 21, 2002, at 05:37  PM, Tom Droege wrote:

> You can always put any work you do into a technical note.  I would 
> propose that you always do this first.  Note that the format of the 
> technical note can be anything.  So it can also be in the format of the 
> journal to which you will eventually submit it.  There is also no 
> practical limit to the length of the technical note.  So you can include 
> all the raw data in the note.  There is good reason to do this as I will 
> explain after I see my dinner guests.  Also, putting stuff in a technical 
> note is not "publishing" so you do not have to worry about second 
> publication.  The technical notes are our internal method of 
> communication.  It just happens that all the world can see them.
>
> Tom Droege
>
> At 04:02 PM 7/21/02 -0500, you wrote:
>> I'm certainly not under the impression that this is complete, but I am 
>> wondering if you guys think this object is worthy of a paper, or if I 
>> should just announce it somewhere less formally?
>>
>> http://www.lolife.com/astronomy/gsc445-1993/paper.pdf
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Michael Koppelman
>>
>
>