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

Re: [ddlm-group] Space as a list item separator>

If both comma and space are permitted then I would treat

[1, 2, 3  4 ]   or  [1,2,3 4]

as equivalent and equivalent to

[1 2 3 4] and [1 , 2 , 3 , 4] and [ 1 2 3 4 ]

At least that is the way I have coded CIFtbx and CBFlib.
=====================================================
  Herbert J. Bernstein, Professor of Computer Science
    Dowling College, Kramer Science Center, KSC 121
         Idle Hour Blvd, Oakdale, NY, 11769

                  +1-631-244-3035
                  yaya@dowling.edu
=====================================================

On Tue, 1 Dec 2009, John Westbrook wrote:

> Could I ask for a clarification of the interpretation of a mixed case
> such as:
>
> [1, 2, 3  4 ]   or  [1,2,3 4]
>
> If quote and space are permitted are the above going to satisfy the
> syntax requiremens?
>
> John
>
>
> Herbert J. Bernstein wrote:
>> First amending the arguments
>>
>> To summarise the arguments:
>>
>> 1. In favour of both space and comma
>>    - comma is used in some other non-CIF contexts as a list delimiter
>>    - comma allows a large subset of lists and arrays to be carried
>> opaquely in CIF 1 and CIF 1.1 documents.
>>
>> 2. Against comma:
>>    - A single type of separator makes the grammar simpler
>>    - Space is used everywhere else in CIF as a separator (consistency)
>>    - Comma can then be used in non-delimited strings
>>
>> Then
>>
>> I vote for comma and space -- 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
>>                  yaya@dowling.edu
>> =====================================================
>>
>> On Tue, 1 Dec 2009, James Hester wrote:
>>
>>> Dear CIF2 people: the time has come to vote on the list item separator
>>> issue.  Firstly: as far as I know, nobody is against space as a
>>> separator,
>>> so spaces will be possible list item separators.  Some may be against
>>> commas, so this vote is on whether or not to allow commas.
>>>
>>> To summarise the arguments:
>>>
>>> 1. In favour of both space and comma
>>>    - comma is used in some other non-CIF contexts as a list delimiter
>>>
>>> 2. Against comma:
>>>    - A single type of separator makes the grammar simpler
>>>    - Space is used everywhere else in CIF as a separator (consistency)
>>>    - Comma can then be used in non-delimited strings
>>>
>>> Space only: Nick, James (Nick is here)
>>> Comma and Space: ?
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 5:30 PM, James Hester <jamesrhester@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>       More specifically, CIF1.1 excludes square brackets as the first
>>>       character in a non-delimited string.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 9:33 AM, James Hester <jamesrhester@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>       Dear Herbert: as CIF 1.1 doesn't define lists, I'm not
>>>       sure why you suggest that the example below is a valid
>>>       tag.
>>>
>>>       On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 12:36 AM, Herbert J. Bernstein
>>>       <yaya@bernstein-plus-sons.com> wrote:
>>>             Sorry something got lost in the prior message.
>>>              It should have
>>>             read:
>>>
>>>                   Dear Colleagues,
>>>
>>>                    Back to the question of commas.
>>>                    If you accept the desirability of
>>>                   having a CIF 1.5, commas in lists
>>>                   become very useful.  Someone with
>>>                   a CIF 1.1 editor will be able to
>>>                   prepare a CIF 1.5 file for many
>>>                   useful cases by doing all lists
>>>                   with commas and no embedded blanks
>>>                   as long as they can make their
>>>                   lists fit on single lines.  In CIF
>>>                   1.1
>>>
>>>                   [[1,2,3],[4,5,6],[7,8,9]]
>>>
>>>                   is a valid value for a tag, but
>>>
>>>                   [[1 2 3] [4 5 6] [7 8 9]]
>>>
>>> is not.
>>>
>>>
>>> No, neither example is a valid CIF 1.1 tag.  CIF 1.1 explicitly
>>> excludes brackets as the first character of a non-delimited
>>> string.
>>>
>>>
>>>             Having the option of commas in lists
>>>             will help to smooth the
>>>             transition for at least some people.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> T +61 (02) 9717 9907
>>> F +61 (02) 9717 3145
>>> M +61 (04) 0249 4148
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> T +61 (02) 9717 9907
>>> F +61 (02) 9717 3145
>>> M +61 (04) 0249 4148
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> T +61 (02) 9717 9907
>>> F +61 (02) 9717 3145
>>> M +61 (04) 0249 4148
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ddlm-group mailing list
>> ddlm-group@iucr.org
>> http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group
>
> _______________________________________________
> ddlm-group mailing list
> ddlm-group@iucr.org
> http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group
>
_______________________________________________
ddlm-group mailing list
ddlm-group@iucr.org
http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group

Reply to: [list | sender only]