[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Reply to: [list | sender only]
Re: Treatment of Greek characters in CIF2
- Subject: Re: Treatment of Greek characters in CIF2
- From: Marcin Wojdyr <wojdyr@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2017 17:46:43 +0100
- DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to;bh=3VhtweuHQA5UMH2uYxWhAR8j6f5BcbC/KiJE1rKxC6U=;b=aGSZlxFm4U21nk2yfoBu+ACT9QjRk91QEAO8R2nyrV4QxfjVbwmjm45hMqPAP35Mt6mHryUYQ3Fvco7LmXxHEyu6jNmCt05qZGktYXftYPCKy4gwGmone7tzBxhOuFJvTu0m+bs0wBGXVM85qnWhapm0LtdVD9h1gYX18A/8dtH3LhEtAKR8ZzjRk2m07d/9xjCGDQlr/SiGWKZhdU9iP47A3ai9HNKgzHOE6GfbROTLdzw2qHGu/NcYyBwmKaGbMFf2Z0LJ3uIyefp4RHB+RSgdXONwv8BlE20nNO4Nrf3JpyNlYCBwfjGTeMRvOKxRd9BWQJxauThM0jlnAWz/sA==
- In-Reply-To: <CAF_YUvWUOYXL0Ek4dq=ZYp-J5PVyMv2m9voKUitsDZjtnLyWTA@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <CAM+dB2d5NCbCb1Zc_QS3KkjscDH7Sk9NQVbQxhLn0nPtO6E+zA@mail.gmail.com><MWHPR04MB0512FE67D8266ED57567F119E01B0@MWHPR04MB0512.namprd04.prod.outlook.com><CAF_YUvX+3ptR1e18wCqH3BKQ9A2=B90mVQ8MVtXePzpKa2=Vbg@mail.gmail.com><MWHPR04MB0512EC6E2F22307C756FC31FE01B0@MWHPR04MB0512.namprd04.prod.outlook.com><CAF_YUvWUOYXL0Ek4dq=ZYp-J5PVyMv2m9voKUitsDZjtnLyWTA@mail.gmail.com>
On 20 April 2017 at 15:25, Robert Hanson <hansonr@stolaf.edu> wrote: > - upper-case keys will be non-CIF metadata or other application-specific or> translation-specific keys,> including CIF1/2 compatibility information From what I understand the alternative here is what John proposed: tohave space in non-CIF keys ("Meta Data").Both options sound good to me. > - UTF-8 character encoding; \uFFFF for CIF <?> and JSON standard null for> <.> I find \uXXXX to be the least elegant point in the proposal.In particular for JSON representing CIF 1.1 that otherwise would nothave non-ASCII characters.I can't think of an application that would need to distinguish between. and ?, so maybe null could represent both?Or maybe 'false' could be abused for one of them? Regarding the software, I added options to my CIF 1.1 converter tomake it compatible with some of the discussed options:configurable '?' replacement and quoting or not the numbers.http://gemmi.readthedocs.io/en/latest/cif-utils.html#gemmi-convert I just tried it on 3j3q.cif. The output is 1/3 larger than the cif,but after gzipping it's only 53% of the gzipped cif!So the file transfer from server to a browser would be almost twicefaster, and JSON.parse() is likely more efficient than CIF parsingfunction coded in JS. the converter is here:https://github.com/project-gemmi/gemmi/and should build with:c++ -O2 -std=c++11 -Ithird_party convert.cc -o gemmi-convert_______________________________________________cif-developers mailing listcif-developers@iucr.orghttp://mailman.iucr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cif-developers
Reply to: [list | sender only]
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Treatment of Greek characters in CIF2 (Robert Hanson)
- References:
- Treatment of Greek characters in CIF2 (James Hester)
- RE: Treatment of Greek characters in CIF2 (Bollinger, John C)
- Re: Treatment of Greek characters in CIF2 (Robert Hanson)
- RE: Treatment of Greek characters in CIF2 (Bollinger, John C)
- Re: Treatment of Greek characters in CIF2 (Robert Hanson)
- Prev by Date: RE: Treatment of Greek characters in CIF2
- Next by Date: Re: Draft JSON specification, round 2
- Prev by thread: RE: Treatment of Greek characters in CIF2
- Next by thread: Re: Treatment of Greek characters in CIF2
- Index(es):