[seqfan] constants of nature in the OEIS

[Андрей Заболотский]

Dear OEIS contributors,
this is a question about some principles of the OEIS.

OEIS has quite many entries for constants of nature, both dimensionless (such as the fine-structure constant A003673) and dimensioned (such as the electron mass A081801). Some of them can be found in the index  https://oeis.org/index/Na . They are usually determined from experiments and thus are known only up to some error.

As far as I understand the current consensus, if a constant is known only up to some error, only the digits that are known for sure should be included. Example: according to CODATA 2014, muon-electron mass ratio A057720 equals 206.7682826(46), so its true value is between 206.7682780 and 206.7682872, so only digits 2067682 should be included in the sequence entry.

Also, only the most recent estimate (confirmed by an authoritative source such as CODATA) should present: there should not be many different sequence entries for the same constant (such as A070064 and A081822, or A271369 and A248503), even though older estimate has been published. New estimates are published on a regular basis, so there's no reason to include all published estimates to the OEIS. (If an outdated estimate has some special historical significance, then it may be kept, of course.) Moreover, if the recommendation from the previous paragraph is followed, then there mostly will be no need for separate entries as the digits which were declared established usually don't change in updated estimates. If we remove the digits which weren't known for sure from A070064 and A081822, they will become the same.

Am I right that these two recommendations are consensusal?
If yes, one in every of two above-given pairs of sequence entries should be declared "dead", and probably these recommendations should be added to  https://oeis.org/wiki/OEIS_format_for_decimal_representation_of_constants  


Best regards,
Andrey

A081801