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

Re: [ddlm-group] The Grazulis eliding proposal: how to incorporateinto CIF?. .. .. .. .

On Wednesday, June 29, 2011 7:32 AM, Herbert J. Bernstein wrote:

>I trust that everybody is aware that we have already agreed to continue to
>accept CIF1 data files for processing with DDLm dictionaries, so any
>'simplification' in the quoting rules is actually a complexification for
>processing software that has to deal with both the CIF1 rules and
>whatever the final CIF2 rules end up being.

That is true, but it's a discussion we already had.  Although I personally favored retaining the CIF 1.1 quoting rules for better backwards compatibility, the matter has already been settled the other way.  At this point I would need a new and surpassingly strong justification to support reopening the issue, and I do not see one.


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

Reply to: [list | sender only]