Re: DDL2/mm_CIF bugs/suggestions

[James Hester <jrh@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Brian for the pointer to the new versions.

> I'll make a formal announcement about the canonical dictionaries
> later this week when I've had time to update the IUCr web pages
> (all have been revised for Volume G, though in many cases the
> revisions are minor rewordings of text definitions).
> 
> If anyone is too keen to await that announcement, the CIF dictionary
> register ftp://ftp.iucr.org/pub/cifdics/cifdic.register will give you
> the URLs of all the latest versions.

> So I'd be grateful if you would try validating mmcif_std.dic version
> 2.0.09 against ddl_core_2.1.3.dic and then against mmcif_ddl_2.1.6.dic   
> (with apologies for the vagaries of the naming scheme).

The only problems I found doing the above checks is that an item from
the _item_description category is missing from all the save frames that
describe categories rather than data blocks.  My interpretation of the
meaning of _category.mandatory_code of 'yes' for _item_description is
that something from this category should always be present in a
definition frame.  This may be a misunderstanding on my part.

These checks don't include checking category_group and sub_group items
for consistency.
_______________________________________________
cif-developers mailing list
cif-developers@iucr.org
http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/cif-developers