Re: re iii.dat

duble.stars Feb 15, 2007

Cheers, then.

It's not that then, maybes the file is okay after all.

I daren't upgrade and test meself coz I've got so many fiddlings and
that with data files nowadays, not to mention a crudely messed about
with gsc22.exe so I can get sdss and denis data, most of which I can't
remember how I did 'em in the first place, that I'd likely never get
things back to how they are now, so I'm frozen pretty much permanently
in a currently one year old Guide 8, I reckon.

I'll stick with the old gcvs.tdf and nl78.tdf I reckon. Most of
namelist 78 is full of rubbish anyway, have you noticed the hundreds
of 16th and 17th mag <0.1 mag amplitude "variables" listed in it from
some obscure open clusters or other, where the source reference don't
even include full lightcurves? Step backwards, stuff like that.

Cheers

John

--- In guide-user@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Pickard" <rdp@...> wrote:
>
> Hi John,
> I saved it as a text file and it opens OK in notepad and reads like
> it's supposed to.
> Cheers,
> Roger
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "duble.stars" <duble.stars@...>
> To: <guide-user@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 7:27 PM
> Subject: [guide-user] re iii.dat
>
>
> >
> > How are people saving this file to hard disk from the browser,
> anyway?
> >
> > Are all browsers equal and likely to automatically save it as flat
> > ascii and as iii.dat (rather than say iii.dat.html which happens
> with
> > some setups)?
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > John
> >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an empty email to:
> > guide-user-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>