Discussion List Archives

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

Re: Result of CIF2 vote

DDLm-group is no less transparent than this group, and consists of
people with an interest in the topic.  DDLm discussions can be
lengthy, and I see no reason to disturb COMCIFS members with no
interest in the details. It is also convenient to have all emails
concerning DDLm archived separately for the record.

I have now sent a couple of emails to DDLm-group regarding string
eliding and everyone is welcome to study them through the web
interface, and join DDLm-group should they wish.

James.

On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 8:16 AM, Herbert J. Bernstein
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Why not just say what those issues are? �If COMCIFS is to vote on
> the CIF2 proposal, and there are serious issues, shouldn't they
> be fully and transparently on the table for everybody to see
> and discuss, or won't we just be going into a loop on this, with
> the DDLm group saying one thing and COMCIFS not agreeing?
>
> I support both the CIF2 draft and Ralf's proposed revision to it.
> I think it is a very good improvement.
>
> As I understand it, what Ralf has proposed is a clean, specific
> modification to the wording of change 7, which currently reads:
>
> =======================
> "CHANGE 7 ? NEW
> Triplequote delimited strings.
>
> The ASCII """ sequence (alternatively ASCII ''') delimits the
> beginning of a string that may contain any printable character and
> whitespace and is terminated by �the first subsequent """ sequence
> (alternatively '''). CIF2 does not specify any �interpretation of the
> contents of
> the string. The string can contain separable " and "" characters,
> (alternatively ' and ''). Clearly, the string within cannot contain
> an ASCII """ (or �alternatively ASCII ''').
>
> For example
>
> """He said "His name is O'Hearly"."""
>
> '''In {\bf \TeX} the accents are \' and \".'''
>
> The string values are, He said "His name is O'Hearly". and In {\bf \TeX}
> the accents are \' and \".. No interpretation of any elides is
> undertaken; this is the responsibility of the calling application.
> The triple quote �string supports embedded newlines, which are
> considered part of the string.
>
> =======================
>
> His revised wording (with one correction) is:
>
> ========================
>
> CHANGE 7 NEW
>
>
> Triple-quote delimited strings.
>
> The following ASCII sequences delimit the beginning of a string:
>
> � � """
> � � '''
> � � r"""
> � � r'''
> � � u"""
> � � u'''
>
> The characters following the delimiter sequence are interpreted
> with exactly the same algorithm as implemented for triple-quoted
> strings in the Python programming language version 2 series.
> In this algorithm, triple-quoted strings are terminated by matching
> """ or ''' delimiters.
>
> For example
>
> � � """He said "His name is O'Hearly"."""
> � � r'''In {\bf \TeX} the accents are \' and \".'''
>
> Triple-quoted strings provide a reliable mechanism for storing any
> arbitrary string in a CIF2 file.
>
> =========================
>
> This is cleaner and simpler than the original change 7 wording.
> It probably does not conflict with existing CIF1 documents and the
> _only_ CIF2 documents it can conflict with are the very few
> that happen to end in \""" or \''''. �The new leading delimiters
> r""", r''', u""" and u''' will have to be added to the list of forbidden
> starts to white-space delimited data values in change 5. �In exchange for
> this minor adjustments to valid CIF2 syntax we gain a fully documented,
> software supported way to include arbitrary strings in a CIF2 document
> that people are already used to working with.
>
> I have reviewed the discussion of the "use of elides in strings"
> thread in the ddlm-group discussion list, and, while I did not
> then and do not now understand the objections to the general use
> of elides in quoted strings, I particularly do not understand
> the logic of objecting to the use of elides in treble-quoted strings,
> which are a construct completely new to CIF and therefore in
> conflict with no existing data files.
>
> Would those who have an objection to Ralf's proposal please
> state their objections. �An objection that says we object because
> in past discussions another body could not manage to come to an
> agreement and just gave up does not speak to the merits of this
> specific proposal.
>
>
> Regards,
> � Herbert
>
>
>
>
>
> At 12:41 AM +1100 1/1/11, James Hester wrote:
>>Dear COMCIFS: I cannot support Ralf's suggestion immediately. �I
>>anticipate issues based on previous discussions in the DDLm group, and
>>will address them in that forum.
>>
>>Happy New Year
>>James.
>>
>>On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 11:53 PM, Herbert J. Bernstein
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>> �Dear Colleagues,
>>>
>>> � �We might save some time if the other voting members of COMCIFS
>>> �were to express there views on Ralf's suggestion for the
>>> �wording change for change 7 immediately. �I support it. �If
>>> �a majority of COMCIFS support it right now, we are in a much less
>>> �ambiguous position than if it is a minority position, and
>>> �can try to make very real progress on coding before Madrid,
>>>
>>> � �Regards,
>>> � � �Herbert
>>>
>>>
>>> �=====================================================
>>> � Herbert J. Bernstein, Professor of Computer Science
>>> � � Dowling College, Kramer Science Center, KSC 121
>>> � � � � �Idle Hour Blvd, Oakdale, NY, 11769
>>>
>>> � � � � � � � � � +1-631-244-3035
>>> � � � � � � � � � [email protected]
>>> �=====================================================
>>>
>>> �On Fri, 31 Dec 2010, James Hester wrote:
>>>
>>>> �Dear COMCIFS members and advisers:
>>>>
>>>> �At the end of the 6-week voting period, the CIF2 draft has been
>>>> �approved 4 votes in favour, one against and one abstention.
>>>>
>>>> �While we can choose to ignore the points raised by Ralf in his
>>>> �dissenting vote, I think it would be worthwhile revisiting eliding in
>>>> �triple-quoted strings. �Such a discussion is best handled in the DDLm
>>>> �group, so if this aspect of the standard interests any of you who are
>>>> �not currently enrolled in the DDLm-group, I suggest that you contact
>>>> �Brian MacMahon to be subscribed.
>>>>
>>>> �I believe the DDLm group will be able to find a solution. �If we are
>>>> �unable to agree, then the standard as currently approved will be the
>>>> �final version. �If we do find a solution, then an amendment to Change
>>>> �7 will once again be presented to this forum for a final vote. �I
>>>> �would hope that we can produce an amendment by the end of January at
>>>> �the latest.
>>>>
>>>> �James Hester.
>>>> �--
>>>> �T +61 (02) 9717 9907
>>>> �F +61 (02) 9717 3145
>>>> �M +61 (04) 0249 4148
>>>> �_______________________________________________
>>>> �comcifs mailing list
>>>> �[email protected]
>>>> �http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/comcifs
>>>>
>>> �_______________________________________________
>>> �comcifs mailing list
>>> �[email protected]
>>> �http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/comcifs
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>T +61 (02) 9717 9907
>>F +61 (02) 9717 3145
>>M +61 (04) 0249 4148
>>_______________________________________________
>>comcifs mailing list
>>[email protected]
>>http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/comcifs
>
>
> --
> =====================================================
> �Herbert J. Bernstein, Professor of Computer Science
> � �Dowling College, Kramer Science Center, KSC 121
> � � � � Idle Hour Blvd, Oakdale, NY, 11769
>
> � � � � � � � � �+1-631-244-3035
> � � � � � � � � �[email protected]
> =====================================================
> _______________________________________________
> comcifs mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/comcifs
>



-- 
T +61 (02) 9717 9907
F +61 (02) 9717 3145
M +61 (04) 0249 4148

Reply to: [list | sender only]