[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Reply to: [list | sender only]
RE: A managed phase-out of DDL1 dictionaries
- To: "Discussion list of the IUCr Committee for the Maintenance of the CIFStandard (COMCIFS)" <comcifs@iucr.org>
- Subject: RE: A managed phase-out of DDL1 dictionaries
- From: Matthew Towler <towler@ccdc.cam.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 2 May 2017 15:24:47 +0000
- Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
- In-Reply-To: <CAM+dB2ddCvQWJZQB8Q-A+qo=Zf0-sHv_AROJJikiXe+=8Ew3jw@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <CAM+dB2fy=0ASMnwF6Rze++qdQ13-ab=dTwUO7SV4NsLgUcFOvg@mail.gmail.com><D9E3F175030713438B5B5883ABA5812B5AAEEAE5@mail03.ccdc.cam.ac.uk><CAM+dB2ddCvQWJZQB8Q-A+qo=Zf0-sHv_AROJJikiXe+=8Ew3jw@mail.gmail.com>
Thanks for the more detailed explanation. I agree with seeing what the state of the community is in two years rather than deciding now. I remain slightly worried about the DDLm matching changes to DDL1 – as code that reads historic CIF already has to cope with quite a few different ways of speci fying space groups (for example) and adding further improved methods will increa se complexity. We may reach a point where parsing a CIF is simple, but writing code that will reliably interpret what is intended by the values in a majority o f extant CIF requires quite a steep learning curve involving many previous versi ons of the dictionaries. I am interested in understanding the benefits in back porting DDLm changes to DD L1, and the trade-off of these against the cost of change. What I am wondering is whether it would be better to have DDL1 remain as-is, and keep the better rep resentations only in DDLm; the advantage being that if DDLm support is being add ed to existing code, then that would also be a good point to add support for imp rovements in semantics. Back porting to DDL1 risks imposes an otherwise unrelat ed change ahead of the need to add DDLm support, which might actually detract fr om the effort required to add DDLm support. Best wishes, Matthew
Reply to: [list | sender only]
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: A managed phase-out of DDL1 dictionaries (James Hester)
- References:
- A managed phase-out of DDL1 dictionaries (James Hester)
- RE: A managed phase-out of DDL1 dictionaries (Matthew Towler)
- Re: A managed phase-out of DDL1 dictionaries (James Hester)
- Prev by Date: Re: A managed phase-out of DDL1 dictionaries
- Next by Date: Re: A managed phase-out of DDL1 dictionaries
- Prev by thread: Re: A managed phase-out of DDL1 dictionaries
- Next by thread: Re: A managed phase-out of DDL1 dictionaries
- Index(es):