Discussion List Archives

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

Re: Resolution as an indicator of data completeness

  • To: Brian McMahon <bm@iucr.org>
  • Subject: Re: Resolution as an indicator of data completeness
  • From: "I. David Brown" <idbrown@mcmail.CIS.McMaster.CA>
  • Date: Tue, 23 Dec 1997 14:30:43 -0500 (EST)
	I agree with George that we should replace *_theta_max_* with
*_resolution_* wherever possible, and certainly in any new items we
define.  We must be careful, however, not to get names confused with
_diffrn_detector_area_resolution_mean which refers to quite a different
type of resolution.  What about: 
 
	_diffrn_reflns_measured_fraction_resolution_full
	_diffrn_reflns_measured_fraction_resolution_max
	_diffrn_reflns_resolution_full
	_diffrn_reflns_resolution_max (alternative to *_theta_max)

All of these should belong to the category diffrn_reflns, not the
categories shown in circular 76.

			David

*****************************************************
Dr.I.David Brown
Brockhouse Institute for Materials Research, 
McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Tel: 1-(905)-525-9140 ext 24710
Fax: 1-(905)-521-2773
*****************************************************

[Send comment to list secretary]
[Reply to list (subscribers only)]