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

Re: [ddlm-group] CIF2 semantics

I take it from the comment below that Herbert agrees to continue with the IT Vol G descriptions of the meanings of . and ?.  I am aware that one often finds a relatively harmless confusion between the two, most obviously when ? is used as a placeholder in a loop  instead of the usually more appropriate <full point>.  This confusion should encourage us to provide clarification in the formal specification.

Regarding numbers, could Herbert or others who wish 4.5 and "4.5" to have different abstract types , whereas kkkkk and "kkkkk" have the same abstract type, please explain why this behaviour is preferable, how it allows useful work to be done etc.   Meanwhile I'll prepare a post describing my reasoning for more uniform behaviour.

On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 10:13 PM, Herbert J. Bernstein <yaya@bernstein-plus-sons.com> wrote:
On null values, I believe "." and "?" are different in meaning from
their unquoted versions, but that unquoted . and ? are both essentially
equivalent null values.

On numbers, past practice has been to treat 4.5 and "4.5" as very
different, the former being a type numb value and the latter being
a type char value.  This was an important and significant early
difference between CIF and STAR and has been used in the handling of
the number-like strings that arise in PDB bib entries, e.g.
1234-5678 is the number 1234e-5678, but "1234-5678" is a string

At 1:24 PM +1000 7/26/11, James Hester wrote:
>Dear DDLm group,
>In order to minimise the number of issues we have to discuss in
>Madrid to clean up CIF2, I would like to turn discussion to those
>semantic issues which are relevant to the syntax.  I believe that
>there are three possible types of datavalue: "inapplicable",
>"unknown" and "string", represented by <full point> (commonly called
>a "full stop" or "period"), <question mark> and everything else,
>Do we all agree with the following assertion regarding full point
>and question mark?
>(1) A full point/question mark inside string delimiters is *not*
>equivalent to an undelimited full point/question mark
>Numbers: I believe that strings that could be interpreted as numbers
>are nevertheless (in a formal sense) just strings in the context of
>the post-parse abstract data model.  Therefore, whether or not a
>numerical string is delimited does not change its value: 4.5 and
>"4.5" are identical values.
>Note that this latter assertion does *not* require that
>CIF-conformant software must always handle numbers as strings; I am
>making these statements in order to clarify the abstract data model
>on which the various DDLs and domain dictionaries operate, not to
>dictate software design.  If your software can manage any potential
>need to swap between string and number representation of your data
>value, then more power to you.
>Please state whether you agree or disagree with the above.
>T +61 (02) 9717 9907
>F +61 (02) 9717 3145
>M +61 (04) 0249 4148
>ddlm-group mailing list

 Herbert J. Bernstein, Professor of Computer Science
   Dowling College, Kramer Science Center, KSC 121
        Idle Hour Blvd, Oakdale, NY, 11769

ddlm-group mailing list

T +61 (02) 9717 9907
F +61 (02) 9717 3145
M +61 (04) 0249 4148
ddlm-group mailing list

Reply to: [list | sender only]