[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Send comment to list secretary]
[Reply to list (subscribers only)]
Re: CoreCIF revision 2.3
- To: Multiple recipients of list <coredmg@iucr.org>
- Subject: Re: CoreCIF revision 2.3
- From: "I. David Brown" <idbrown@mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca>
- Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 14:04:23 +0100 (BST)
Thank you Howard for your usual incisive (if boring) analysis. As a result of your observations I will remove the _*_status item from the list 7 and add it to items needing more discussion. I think the person who asked for this wanted to use it to check the numbers of non-systematic absences when all reflections had been measured. The logical inconsistencies in this approach certainly suggest that we should look more carefully at this item. The bond multiplicity will benefit from your more precise wording and can remain as a candidate for the 2.3 revision. 'Equivalence' must have different meanings in different contexts and it is not appropriate to burden the word with a precise mathematical definition unless this definition is implied by the context. In the present context 'symmetry-equivalent bonds' would readily be understood. I look forward to other comments on list 7 and later on the cumulative list of 2.3 revsions when these are posted. David ***************************************************** Dr.I.David Brown, Professor Emeritus Brockhouse Institute for Materials Research, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada Tel: 1-(905)-525-9140 ext 24710 Fax: 1-(905)-521-2773 idbrown@mcmaster.ca *****************************************************
[Send comment to list secretary]
[Reply to list (subscribers only)]
- Prev by Date: Re: CoreCIF revision 2.3
- Next by Date: Re: CoreCIF revision 2.3
- Prev by thread: Re: CoreCIF revision 2.3
- Next by thread: Re: CoreCIF revision 2.3
- Index(es):