[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Reply to: [list | sender only]
RE: Towards the definition of a phase identifier
- To: Multiple recipients of list <phase-identifiers@iucr.org>
- Subject: RE: Towards the definition of a phase identifier
- From: "S. C. Abrahams" <sca@mind.net>
- Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 19:30:43 +0100 (BST)
From: Sidney Abrahams Many thanks to David for his most helpful message of June 10, 2002 summarizing the present progress in settling on a set of criteria for constructing unambiguous phase identifiers. Presumably, we may all agree that the identifier definition should be both unambiguous and unique, also that it appears necessary for the identifier to be multi-field with the possibility of allowing redundant fields that they may not be necessary to use for every phase. In addition, there is clear value in setting one field aside that can be occupied by an external identifier if one is available. I also agree with David's suggestion in his Item 7 to make use of a composition formula field. In addition, the proposal to handle variable composition phases by means of a composition loop is fine and should allow identification of individual members of large groups of inorganic phases. In thinking how we can extend these criteria to incommensurate, composition-changed morphotropic, polytype, transient-structural, and quasicrystalline phases as well as noncrystalline solid state phases, the simplest approach may be to provide an additional field that identifies the phase category if different from those in which the simpler criteria work. For example, the following phases could be flagged by a three letter code such as: incommensurate phase.......Inc composition-changed morphotropic phase.....Com polytype phase......Pol transient-structural phase.......Tra quasicrystalline phase.....Qua noncrystalline phase.....Non or by an initial letter only, so that identification would be restricted to phases of the type as given. In the case of the compound SO2(C6H4Cl)2, used as an example by Toledano et al., if the term "Inc" were present, it would lead to the stable phase below 150 K. If not, it would result in the commensurate phase above 150 K. This and many other examples in each of the phase categories above are given by Toledano et al. in Acta Cryst. (2001). A57, 614-626. A thorough check of all proposals made is of course essential to be sure they are both unambiguous and unique. Before any such time consuming task is undertaken by the Working Group, it would be strongly preferable for members to examine critically the proposals made in order to identify any weaknesses they may detect. If any member disagrees with any of the proposals made by David or that above, it would stimulate discussion to have the reasons stated forthwith. Sidney xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Prof. S. C. Abrahams Physics Department Southern Oregon University Ashland, OR 97520 Fax: (541) 552-6415 Tel: (541) 482 7942 Email: sca@mind.net xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Reply to: [list | sender only]
- Prev by Date: Towards the definition of a phase identifier
- Next by Date: Phase Identifiers 2
- Prev by thread: Towards the definition of a phase identifier
- Next by thread: contribution to working group (fwd)
- Index(es):