Discussion List Archives

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

Re: Reserved prefixes

  • To: [email protected]
  • Subject: Re: Reserved prefixes
  • From: Brian McMahon via comcifs <[email protected]>
  • Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2026 09:33:08 +0100
  • Cc: Brian McMahon <[email protected]>
  • DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=iucr.org; s=mailman;t=1784709186; bh=Qhl2aUEu8x/gEMDkqlBBsXlvnrhlVSyILhV9iKbM9cg=;h=Date:Subject:To:References:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc: From;b=OHYMbGcP4K0jv4Mf8mWBERD3Nmc/iX4xb+N4e/HKqFEOcnXmkrzaFoBGt7Gj4FamD XhslwO62vReTovtR4FqM/aZqrX4DIahmGYCXIMFt9blUci1ZwTbrZB4NDpipwl8FNl In1O/aH3rf0mtytguS3/Uox5OaIlS3H1WMwSWa/uk/1hLDtWJhwvc65zH5gC40FlnQ X213dB/1uHUndb8r6r+rgmakEtCCnH+Huzk3VthsgWXcxvrTSg68T6i8GlJCH2YFs+ N2PVt2sD7yM1QL1Mdev8kqFSETIMgAQFqT/IX/ym2ISWs+inHYbTTHov9JimUsa0dD IHtt1g306AUAA==
  • In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
  • References: <[email protected]><[email protected]><[email protected]>
> " Do COMCIFS (and contributors) want to continue/encourage the> practice of *registering* local data name prefixes "
Recent experience suggests that the community still strongly values thisfeature. The electron diffraction extensions to core CIF wereaccompanied by registration of a local prefix for initial testing. CODand associated groups routinely register prefixes to provide namespacepartition for database extensions outside crystallography.
A public list is essential to avoid name conflicts. (It is alsoimportant to have a moderator of the list who can - as I haveconsistently done - guide applicants where the choice of prefix may beproblematic.) The mechanism on the IUCr website has worked well for 30years, is simple in concept and to maintain, and its URL has been widelypublished (in Volume G and elsewhere). As sponsor of the entire CIFframework, IUCr, I believe, has the responsibility to maintain itsresources in the most stable manner possible. This is best achieved bycontinuing to exercise control over its own publication platform (i.e.website).
We need to think long-term. GitHub has useful features but is now aproduct owned by a company with more specific commercial objectives.COMCIFS is an appointed committee, with (currently) recruitmentdifficulties and some degree of overlap with CommDat. In my view,retaining the official publication of CIF dictionaries and associatedsupporting infrastructure on the Union's website emphasises itsprovenance and the agency responsible for its long-term support.
Brian
On 21/07/2026 22:10, Simon Westrip via comcifs wrote:> Totally agree.> > To avoid confusion, perhaps I should rephrase my first question:> > " Do COMCIFS (and contributors) want to continue/encourage the practice> of *registering* local data name prefixes "> > i.e. do we need to maintain a register of such prefixes at all  (I> suspect not :-)> > Cheers> > Simon> > On 21/07/2026 18:48, Peter Murray-Rust via comcifs wrote:>>>>>> On 21/07/2026 17:45, Simon Westrip via comcifs wrote:>>> The page at https://www.iucr.org/cgi-bin/cifreserve.pl describes>>> 'reserved prefixes', primarily allowing developers to create 'local'>>> data names without necessarily publishing an associated dictionary.>>>>>> As the IUCr is leaning towards 'opening up' CIF-related content>>> development and discussion by migrating to GitHub (while still>>> promoting/publishing/maintaining CIF content on its websites and>>> through its publications), I have a couple of questions:>>>>>> 1) Do COMCIFS (and contributors) want to continue/encourage this>>> practice? >>>>> I am a strong believer in local data names (I do a lot of this>> elsewhere). Generally local names belong to a community of practice>> and they can operate within themselves. As long as local names are>> clearly local and ignorable by software then the system works. This>> was the great vision of TBL in the web - links can break and fail>> gracefully. >>> NB  the registry seems to be active (3 registered prefixes in 2026)>>>>>> 2) Should this facility be migrated to the COMCIFS GitHub repository?>>>>>> For example, a simple repository containing a list of 'approved'>>> prefixes (along with associated metadata, ideally in CIF format),>>> with ability to request additions via GitHub's issue mechanism. >> Again I think Github (or whatever comes next) creates a stable centre>> that everyone can manage. >>>> The world is much more literate than when CIF or HTML wast started.>> Software doesn't require rigidity - it can deal with errors. >>>> Postels's Law: (1980) >> /Be conservative in what you do, be liberal in what you accept from>> others"/. In simple terms: always ensure your outputs strictly follow>> standard specifications, but make your inputs as forgiving and>> adaptable as possible>>>> PeterMR>>>> _______________________________________________>> comcifs mailing list>> [email protected]>> https://mailman.iucr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/comcifs> > _______________________________________________> comcifs mailing list> [email protected]> https://mailman.iucr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/comcifs_______________________________________________comcifs mailing [email protected]https://mailman.iucr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/comcifs

Reply to: [list | sender only]