[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Reply to: [list | sender only]
Re: [ddlm-group] Finalizing DDLm
- To: Group finalising DDLm and associated dictionaries <ddlm-group@iucr.org>
- Subject: Re: [ddlm-group] Finalizing DDLm
- From: David Brown <idbrown@mcmaster.ca>
- Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 10:10:14 -0400
- In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1003310726160.14239@epsilon.pair.com>
- References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1003302241440.41971@epsilon.pair.com> <C7D8E0F6.13106%nick@csse.uwa.edu.au> <g2g279aad2a1003302136jcb40e1fei8d172a992ef5def1@mail.gmail.com><alpine.BSF.2.00.1003310726160.14239@epsilon.pair.com>
Just for the record, all I wanted to know is whether we have to use
the loop structure for list categories when there is only one row or
whether is is optional. I was open minded when we started this
discussion, but now I think it safer always to use the loop structure.
What Herbert is talking about is an implementation that reads earlier
CIFs and clearly it has to be much more flexible, but this does not
mean that we should not aim for a simple and more rigorous standard for
DDLm/ And I assume that _refln.wavelength 1.56 loop_ _refln_refln.h _refln_refln.k _refln_refln.l _refln_refln.intensity 1 0 0 1543.27 implies that the wavelength belongs to the listed reflections. I guess this is really defined in the description of _refln.wavelength but there would seem to be an implicit relationship that would not be there if the name of the first item were _refln_wavelength.actual since it would then not be in an ancestral category. David Herbert J. Bernstein wrote: The advantage is allowing existing data CIFs to be used without the |
begin:vcard fn:I.David Brown n:Brown;I.David org:McMaster University;Brockhouse Institute for Materials Research adr:;;King St. W;Hamilton;Ontario;L8S 4M1;Canada email;internet:idbrown@mcmaster.ca title:Professor Emeritus tel;work:+905 525 9140 x 24710 tel;fax:+905 521 2773 version:2.1 end:vcard
_______________________________________________ ddlm-group mailing list ddlm-group@iucr.org http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group
Reply to: [list | sender only]
- References:
- Re: [ddlm-group] Finalizing DDLm (Herbert J. Bernstein)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Finalizing DDLm (Nick Spadaccini)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Finalizing DDLm (James Hester)
- Re: [ddlm-group] Finalizing DDLm (Herbert J. Bernstein)
- Prev by Date: Re: [ddlm-group] Finalizing DDLm
- Next by Date: Re: [ddlm-group] Finalizing DDLm
- Prev by thread: Re: [ddlm-group] Finalizing DDLm
- Next by thread: Re: [ddlm-group] Finalizing DDLm
- Index(es):