[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: Robert Hanson <hansonr@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2017 11:19:48 -0500
- DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=stolaf.edu; s=stolaf;h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to;bh=MJhIBGwL/osSqaK61MqzXolEiOlMsefxBZVGrXipuq0=;b=wS7GGTowWrBDKAFhvffwjjjDktTpFBLrt8iO6Tkv7TN+90aR5621j9W2Hl2wd5JW0DP4F9M8AyXotOMMQnkhTIXzEcMMJeRwmTx53AfWSLClxM+ew172RBM4gjFmi3d9IKDwjHeZedFwSMp+Laab9GpgM8bYws2iMgizE1ul/v4=
- In-Reply-To: <CACaHzQU4p6pFT1muv=6VkOo5Do0cbZmgGo6HbzowQpo4Jw1MOg@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><CACaHzQU4p6pFT1muv=6VkOo5Do0cbZmgGo6HbzowQpo4Jw1MOg@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 11:46 AM, Marcin Wojdyr <wojdyr@gmail.com> wrote:
I find \uXXXX to be the least elegant point in the proposal.
In particular for JSON representing CIF 1.1 that otherwise would not
have 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?
The key is not to think about application. "The special
values of '.' and '?' represent data that are inapplicable or
unknown, respectively."
There is not our job to assume those mean the same thing.
Regarding the software, I added options to my CIF 1.1 converter to
make 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 twice
faster, and JSON.parse() is likely more efficient than CIF parsing
function coded in JS.
Both very good points.
Bob
--
Robert M. Hanson
Larson-Anderson Professor of Chemistry
St. Olaf College
Northfield, MN
http://www.stolaf.edu/people/hansonr
If nature does not answer first what we want,
it is better to take what answer we get.
-- Josiah Willard Gibbs, Lecture XXX, Monday, February 5, 1900
Larson-Anderson Professor of Chemistry
St. Olaf College
Northfield, MN
http://www.stolaf.edu/people/hansonr
If nature does not answer first what we want,
it is better to take what answer we get.
-- Josiah Willard Gibbs, Lecture XXX, Monday, February 5, 1900
_______________________________________________ cif-developers mailing list cif-developers@iucr.org http://mailman.iucr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cif-developers
Reply to: [list | sender only]
- 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)
- Re: Treatment of Greek characters in CIF2 (Marcin Wojdyr)
- Prev by Date: Re: Draft JSON specification, round 2
- Next by Date: Re: Treatment of Greek characters in CIF2
- Prev by thread: Re: Treatment of Greek characters in CIF2
- Next by thread: Re: Treatment of Greek characters in CIF2
- Index(es):