(JOHN PAZMINO) wrote in message ...
Variable star designations are addigned by AAVSO, which does a
remarkably thoro function at naming stars quickly. However, it deals
with stars within its own observing program, which means stars within
reach of home instruments. I suggest that ASAS star is so faint that
AAVSO didn't include it in its program [yet?].

AAVSO (I think) assigns what is called a "Harvard" designation
reflecting the rough 1900.0 position of a variable (i.e. "0020+11" for
the new cataclysmic in Pisces) but is not responsible for the
permanent designations (such as SS Cygni, V592 Herculis, etc.) - those
fall to the jurisdiction of the IAU. My question was about why some
recent novae have been so quickly assigned permanent designations
(apparently within a couple of days for some recent novae), while many
other variables that have been known for years still go only by such
cumbersome names as "NSV 00895", "Lanning 17", and
"SDSSpJ072910.68+365838.3". Why was not NSV 00895 designated "V522
Arietis" (or whatever) by now?

IAU thru CBAT is supposed to name novae when they are announced
thru the IUACs. now, you kind of have to know what the state of IUACs
is nowadays, yes?

Yes, the whole IAU circular thing is a bit odd, too, but I guess
that's another topic altogether. Withholding information about new
time-crucial discoveries seems counterproductive scientifically,
though I can understand that CBAT needs to cover their expenses.
Fortunately most circular information that is of interest to us
amateurs is quickly disseminated via other web sources. VSNET was
particularly good about this, but sadly seems to be dead now.