[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Reply to: [list | sender only]
CIF specification: reserved prefixes
- To: [email protected]
- Subject: CIF specification: reserved prefixes
- From: Brian McMahon <[email protected]>
- Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 12:06:15 +0000
Dear Colleagues
While working through the content of International Tables Volume G, I have
come upon two statements that are in flat contradiction. In the CIF
specification, regarding the use of registered prefixes to reserve a
namespace of data items for local use, it is stated:
\P 12. There is no syntactic property identifying such a reserved
prefix, so that software validating or otherwise handling
such local data names must scan the entire registry and
match registered prefixes against the indicated components
of data names. Note that reserved prefixes may themselves
contain underscore characters, so a maximal matching search
must be made.
while in chapter 3.1, "General considerations when defining a CIF data
item", I find I have written
3.1.2.2. Reserved prefixes
To guarantee that locally devised data names may be placed without
name conflict in interchange data files, authors may register a
reserved character string for their sole use. As with the special
prefix _[local]_ discussed in the preceding section, the author's
reserved prefix is simply an underscore-bounded string within the data
name (i.e. it may not itself include an underscore character).
I can in fact see no useful purpose in permitting an underscore *within* a
registered prefix - it simply complicates the task of the parser. At this
stage no prefixes have been registered with an embedded underscore. I
therefore propose to amend paragraph 12 of the CIF working spec, replacing
the final sentence by
"Note that reserved prefixes may not themselves contain underscore
characters."
Please let me have your opinions on this as quickly as possible. I shall
continue to work on the Volume on the assumption that no objections will be
raised to this amendment.
Regards
Brian
Reply to: [list | sender only]
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: CIF specification: reserved prefixes (I. David Brown)
- Re: CIF specification: reserved prefixes (Sydney R Hall)
- Re: CIF specification: reserved prefixes (Brian H. Toby)
- Re: CIF specification: reserved prefixes (Howard Flack)
- Re: CIF specification: reserved prefixes (Herbert J. Bernstein)
- Prev by Date: New version (2.3) of core CIF dictionary available
- Next by Date: Re: CIF specification: reserved prefixes
- Prev by thread: IUPAC workshop on XML and IChI
- Next by thread: Re: CIF specification: reserved prefixes
- Index(es):

