X-Sympa-To: ids.analysis.forum Received: from hector.cls.fr (osis.cls.fr [62.161.32.21]) by hermes.cls.fr (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA02351 for ; Fri, 14 Oct 2005 10:48:29 +0200 Received: by hector.cls.fr (Postfix) id 77ED1943E3; Fri, 14 Oct 2005 08:48:28 +0000 (GMT) Delivered-To: ids.analysis.forum@cls.fr Received: from rly02d.srv.mailcontrol.com (orange-103.cls.fr [62.161.32.14]) by hector.cls.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2BCE116F8F for ; Fri, 14 Oct 2005 08:48:27 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtp1.ign.fr (smtp1.ign.fr [192.134.141.226]) by rly02d.srv.mailcontrol.com (MailControl) with ESMTP id j9E8mMuD017440 for ; Fri, 14 Oct 2005 09:48:23 +0100 Received: from [172.16.0.131] (rama.ign.fr [172.16.0.131]) by smtp1.ign.fr (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j9E8mFXP023601 for ; Fri, 14 Oct 2005 10:48:17 +0200 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: herfag@pop.ign.fr Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 10:47:52 +0200 To: ids.analysis.forum@cls.fr From: "H.Fagard" Subject: Re: [ids.analysis.forum] DOMES number change for Hartebeesthoek? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" ; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailcontrol-Inbound: 4wnd!s!p9LR4o+QFvM6fko6PYHaLGMlP X-Spam-Score: 0.3 X-Scanned-By: MailControl A-05-40-01 (www.mailcontrol.com) on 10.68.0.112 X-Validation-by: laurent.soudarin@cls.fr Hi all, At 0:52 -0500 14/10/05, John C. Ries wrote: >we don't assign a new number just because of some change or even >upgrade in the receiver, as long as the reference point is unchanged. I agree with this principle, but see the possible minor drawback below. At 10:09 +0200 14/10/05, Zuheir Altamimi wrote: >That is exactly what I already said to Herve. Yes Zuheir, but I nevertheless wanted to aks the analysis centers if this might cause them any trouble. >The DOMES number will NOT change...! OK, but the following minor drawback is worth mentionning: As far as I know, our database (at IGN) can only handle one 4-CHAR ID (be it IGS or DORIS) per DOMES number. This means that we will have to replace the current HBKB acronym with HBLB. Therefore HBKB will not show up in future ITRFXXXX releases, which list all points identified and classified by their DOMES number, but also shows the associated 4-CHAR ID for easier identification. I am wrong? Hervé