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

RE: magCIF - policy advice requested


I feel it would be unfortunate to conflate the production of a new dictionary (magCIF) with adoption of a new data standard (DDLm).  The former can quickly provide useful features for storage of additional data and only requires the agreement of those with an interest in magCIF.  The latter will be a much longer process requiring a much wider array of stakeholders to make a commitment and donate resources, which would in my opinion significantly delay the adoption of magCIF.  DDL1 has a huge advantage in already being supported, and more importantly well understood and actively used, by the wider community, so to me it seems the ideal choice for any new dictionary.

> While magCIF authors will no doubt be cognisant of the lack of initial CIF2 support in the wider community, 
> and therefore provide alternate datanames, this is an opportunity to:

Opinions stated are entirely my own, and are not those of my employer, the CCDC.

Matthew
_______________________________________________
comcifs mailing list
comcifs@iucr.org
http://mailman.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/comcifs

Reply to: [list | sender only]