Discussion List Archives

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


On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 16:26 +0100, Matthew Towler wrote:
> 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.

Yes, I think John expressed the situation very clearly, and I think of
the changes that have been suggested as janitorial work rather than
trying to enhance DDL1.  

You mentioned the relationship between DDL1 and DDL2.  Standing where I
am (largely unaware of the technical considerations that went into the
DDL2 design decisions) it appears that the DDL2 authors did 2 things;
they "cleaned up" DDL1, and they enhanced it (In the latter category I'm
thinking particularly of the way parent-child relationships are
expressed in DDL2, and the use of implicit attributes).  If DDL1 were to
adopt some of the DDL2 cleanups it would still (fortunately or
unfortunately) be a long way from being DDL2, but be a more robust

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.