Discussion List Archives

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

Re: CoreCIF revision 2.3

  • To: Multiple recipients of list <coredmg@iucr.org>
  • Subject: Re: CoreCIF revision 2.3
  • From: "I. David Brown" <idbrown@mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca>
  • Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 14:04:23 +0100 (BST)
	Thank you Howard for your usual incisive (if boring) analysis.
As a result of your observations I will remove the _*_status item from the
list 7 and add it to items needing more discussion.  I think the
person who asked for this wanted to use it to check the numbers of
non-systematic absences when all reflections had been measured.  The
logical inconsistencies in this approach certainly suggest that we should
look more carefully at this item.

	The bond multiplicity will benefit from your more precise wording
and can remain as a candidate for the 2.3 revision.  'Equivalence' must
have different meanings in different contexts and it is not appropriate to
burden the word with a precise mathematical definition unless this
definition is implied by the context.  In the present context
'symmetry-equivalent bonds' would readily be understood.

	I look forward to other comments on list 7 and later on the
cumulative list of 2.3 revsions when these are posted.


Dr.I.David Brown,  Professor Emeritus
Brockhouse Institute for Materials Research,
McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Tel: 1-(905)-525-9140 ext 24710
Fax: 1-(905)-521-2773

[Send comment to list secretary]
[Reply to list (subscribers only)]