[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Reply to: [list | sender only]
Re: [ddlm-group] Feedback on draft CIF2 specification fromJohn Bollinger
- To: Group finalising DDLm and associated dictionaries <ddlm-group@iucr.org>
- Subject: Re: [ddlm-group] Feedback on draft CIF2 specification fromJohn Bollinger
- From: Joe Krahn <krahn@niehs.nih.gov>
- Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 15:31:20 -0400
- In-Reply-To: <n2w279aad2a1004121933k1888e0f0m33fa5714db94253a@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <n2w279aad2a1004121933k1888e0f0m33fa5714db94253a@mail.gmail.com>
James Hester wrote: > Dear all, > > If you haven't seen John Bollinger's useful feedback on our draft CIF2 specification, I recommend that you read it at > > http://www.iucr.org/__data/iucr/lists/cif-developers/msg00269.html > A few more comments: Point 22: (implicit line joining) The sentence "There is implicit line joining, and the newline has no meaning with regard to the List values." should be removed. Newline is a valid whitespace token, as everywhere else. The idea of "implicit line joining" is no more useful here than for a row of _loop item values. In CHANGE 8, does "implicit line joining" imply that the newline in the example below does not count? If so, that is a very problematic special case. "description":"""Cubic space group and metric cell vectors""" ------------ point 24: (The Reasoning subsection contains only descriptions and explanations, not any reasoning or even justification / rationale.) For many changes, the justification is vague. Many of the changes seem driven by personal opinions rather than actual parsing/computing needs. It would be nice to see detailed justifications. Joe Krahn _______________________________________________ ddlm-group mailing list ddlm-group@iucr.org http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group
Reply to: [list | sender only]
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: [ddlm-group] Feedback on draft CIF2 specification fromJohn Bollinger
- Next by Date: [ddlm-group] [John.Bollinger@STJUDE.ORG: Re: Feedback on draft CIF2specification from JohnBollinger]
- Prev by thread: Re: [ddlm-group] Feedback on draft CIF2 specification fromJohn Bollinger
- Next by thread: [ddlm-group] Moving on to DDLm discussion
- Index(es):