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

Re: [ddlm-group] Vote on moving elide discussion to COMCIFS. .. .

Dear Herbert,

On Monday, February 21, 2011 2:35 PM, you wrote:
>   Other than my own messages, could you point me to where there
>was a discussion of the actual proposal Ralf made, rather than
>of variations and interpretations, but of the actual wording
>change Ralf proposed for the CIF2 document?  I cannot seem
>to find that.  That wording seemed/seems pretty sensible to
>me.

For reference, the message to the COMCIFS list in which Ralf proposed his wording change is archived here: http://www.iucr.org/__data/iucr/lists/comcifs-l/msg00500.html

Some messages on the DDLm list, other than your own, in which Ralf's proposal is directly discussed include these:

http://www.iucr.org/__data/iucr/lists/ddlm-group/msg00899.html
http://www.iucr.org/__data/iucr/lists/ddlm-group/msg00901.html
http://www.iucr.org/__data/iucr/lists/ddlm-group/msg00904.html
http://www.iucr.org/__data/iucr/lists/ddlm-group/msg00906.html
http://www.iucr.org/__data/iucr/lists/ddlm-group/msg00921.html

Some of those also discuss alternatives, but all of them discuss Ralf's proposal, a.k.a. proposal P.  I probably missed some, and of course your own comments in favor of proposal P are not represented.

Moreover, it distorts the (meta-)discussion to ignore commentary about alternative proposals.  The existence and characteristics of alternatives to Ralf's proposal are relevant to any decision about it.  That the discussion shifted to focusing on alternatives is natural given that most participants in the discussion disfavored proposal P.

I hope this helps.


Regards,

John

--
John C. Bollinger, Ph.D.
Department of Structural Biology
St. Jude Children's Research Hospital



Email Disclaimer:  www.stjude.org/emaildisclaimer

_______________________________________________
ddlm-group mailing list
ddlm-group@iucr.org
http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/ddlm-group

Reply to: [list | sender only]