Discussion List Archives

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

Re: Tidying up DDL1 (last time?)

> I don't think I see how
> supporting two different versions of DDL 1 would be any more difficult
> than supporting both DDL 1 and DDL 2; could you expand on that?  Any way
> around, I would expect most new software to support just the
> (hypothetical) DDL 1.5, not both 1.4 (or earlier) and 1.5.

The sentence following your question and the quote below make my 
comments rather redundant.  As long as a hypothetical DDL 1.5 did not 
make the vast majority of existing DDL 1.4 CIFs invalid then there is 
not a problem and programs could be updated as you suggest. I had 
misunderstood that 1.4 and 1.5 would be incompatible in some way.

> It is also desirable that any DDL changes should
> not ... render
> CIFs invalid that are valid under the dictionaries as they stand today.
> very many of the CIFs written against the [current]
> core dictionary are *not* valid *because* of .. dictionary and
> DDL flaws ... it may be that the proposed changes will be able to make many of
> these currently-invalid CIFs valid against the revised dictionary / DDL
> combination.

Thanks for the clarification

Matthew Towler

cif-developers mailing list

Reply to: [list | sender only]
International Union of Crystallography

Scientific Union Member of the International Science Council (admitted 1947). Member of CODATA, the ISC Committee on Data. Partner with UNESCO, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization in the International Year of Crystallography 2014.

International Science Council Scientific Freedom Policy

The IUCr observes the basic policy of non-discrimination and affirms the right and freedom of scientists to associate in international scientific activity without regard to such factors as ethnic origin, religion, citizenship, language, political stance, gender, sex or age, in accordance with the Statutes of the International Council for Science.