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

[ddlm-group] Multiple encodings for CIF2?

• To: ddlm-group <ddlm-group@iucr.org>
• Subject: [ddlm-group] Multiple encodings for CIF2?
• From: James Hester <jamesrhester@gmail.com>
• Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 16:55:48 +1000

Dear DDLm-ers,

It seems that we are destined to reopen the debate on multiple
encodings.  The common ground as far as I can tell is that all
compliant CIF2 readers/writers must be able to produce UTF-8 encoded
files (if encoding is mentioned at all), and will not be required to
read/write any other encoding.  The issues requiring discussion that I
can see are:

1. Should encoding be specified at all in the CIF2 standard?

2. If yes to (1), then we are all agreed that UTF8 must be supported
by compliant processors.  What other encodings, if any, should be
supported?  Should this support be optional?

To put my own point of view (again), I do not see a use for multiple
encodings that would justify the added complexity and the threat to
reliable file transmission over time and space.  I am therefore in
favour of saying yes to (1), and specifying UTF8.  This makes a whole
bunch of issues go away.


-- 
T +61 (02) 9717 9907
F +61 (02) 9717 3145
M +61 (04) 0249 4148
_______________________________________________
ddlm-group mailing list
ddlm-group@iucr.org
http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group

Reply to: [list | sender only]

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [ddlm-group] Multiple encodings for CIF2? (SIMON WESTRIP)

• Prev by Date: Re: [ddlm-group] Character set for data block and save frame codes
• Next by Date: Re: [ddlm-group] Multiple encodings for CIF2?
• Prev by thread: Re: [ddlm-group] options/text vs binary/end-of-line. .. .. .
• Next by thread: Re: [ddlm-group] Multiple encodings for CIF2?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread