[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Reply to: [list | sender only]
Re: _chemical_formula[]
- To: "Discussion list of the IUCr Committee for the Maintenance of the CIFStandard (COMCIFS)" <comcifs@iucr.org>
- Subject: Re: _chemical_formula[]
- From: Howard Flack <crystal@flack.ch>
- Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2004 18:59:16 +0200
- In-reply-to: <5.1.1.6.0.20040919092511.03563530@pop.hermes.cam.ac.uk>
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0409041834570.9129-100000@owari.msl.titech.ac.jp><Pine.LNX.4.44.0409041834570.9129-100000@owari.msl.titech.ac.jp><5.1.1.6.0.20040919092511.03563530@pop.hermes.cam.ac.uk>
Peter has a good point with regard to _chemical_formula[] that should be borne in mind in relation to the work of the "group" coreCIFchem. The names need to indicate as precisely and succintly as possible the source of the information. However I must say that I think that particularly bad in this respect are suffixes such as _meas and _calc because more or less everything we deal with comes from some sort of a measurement and has to be calculated to a greater or lesser extent. Much better are _analytical or _massspectrometry or _xraydiffraction . > It will eventually report to the coreCIF Dictionary Maintenance Group but at the moment it is still work in progress. To be honest, the "group" desperately needs help from the likes of PMR. H. In my opinion, further discussion on this point should be pushed off to the coreDMG or coreCIFchem list.
Reply to: [list | sender only]
- References:
- Re: CIF Infoset (ddb)
- _chemical_formula[] (Peter Murray-Rust)
- Prev by Date: Re: _chemical_formula[]
- Next by Date: Florence Congress
- Prev by thread: Re: _chemical_formula[]
- Next by thread: COMCIFS open meeting a Florence
- Index(es):