[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: spilt lists in DDL 1.4

• Subject: Re: spilt lists in DDL 1.4
• From: James Hester <jrh@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
• Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 17:39:30 +0900
• In-Reply-To: <f88313c527153ace90141182c248287f@nist.gov>
• References: <f88313c527153ace90141182c248287f@nist.gov>

On Tue, 2005-06-21 at 12:24 -0400, Brian Toby wrote:
 [...]
> The more formality that CIF places on relationships between related 
> data items, the greater chance that someone will come up with a 
> crystallographically useful situation that breaks that relationship. To 
> treat the new paradigm, CIF will have to catch up (fast!) and define an 
> entirely new dictionary populated with previously-defined data items, 
> but having different relationships defined or define a entirely new set 
> of data items with definitions identical with existing items. In the 
> short term, data will be lost from the publication stream, because the 
> standard cannot accommodate it. Further, when there are too many ways 
> for the same information to be included in a CIF, the value of having a 
> standardized format diminishes because it becomes increasing difficult 
> for software to use that information.
> 
> IMHO, go gently with formalizing data relationships.

I agree.  Fixing _atom_site_aniso_label would actually allow more
flexibility in data presentation (and catch up with general usage) in
this one case.   
_______________________________________________
cif-developers mailing list
cif-developers@iucr.org
http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/cif-developers

Reply to: [list | sender only]

• References:
  • spilt lists in DDL 1.4 (Brian Toby)

• Prev by Date: Draft and analysis of proposed change to DDL1.4 to fix_atom_site_aniso_label
• Next by Date: Re: Draft and analysis of proposed change to DDL1.4 tofix _atom_site_aniso_label
• Prev by thread: spilt lists in DDL 1.4
• Next by thread: _atom_site_aniso_label is broken
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread