[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Reply to: [list | sender only]
Re: Response to Pflugrath
- To: Multiple recipients of list <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Response to Pflugrath
- From: Andy Hammersley <[email protected]>
- Date: Fri, 12 Jan 1996 11:20:24 -0500 (EST)
Hi Jim,
Try: Acta Cryst: (1991), A47, 655-685 which includes the CIF Dictionary
(Core Version 1991).
For this and version II, and other CIFS, try WWW:
http://www.iucr.ac.uk/cif/home.html
We've just had a joint Neutron / X-ray software workshop ("NOBUGS") so
Bob Sweet has been here along with John Skinner, and Neutron scatterers from
Argonne. This has given me a chance to meet Bob. An informal discussion was
held on data formats: "imageNCIF" and what was previously "HADES" and is
now being called "NEXUS". Perhaps the two initiatives are sufficiently
different to both be valid ?
My summary would be:
NEXUS (based on HDF): Powerful, complicated, heavyweight, with base
support by NCSA
"imageNCIF": Simple, limited (whilst of course being potentially
extensible), lightweight, but code must be written (or adapted)
I could imagine NEXUS/HDF being a better "transport" mechanism for a
small close scientific community with complicated demands on the variety
of data types that they wanted to store in files.
"imageNCIF" could be better for simpler needs and more appropriate for
efficient data acquisition.
A question which I feel is equal valid for both initiatives, and equally
unanswered is:
How general is the format trying to be ? e.g. Should it cover an EXAFS
spectra with several different counter values per time bin ?
Other people may of course see things a little differently !
Best Regards,
Andy Hammersley
Reply to: [list | sender only]
- Prev by Date: Re: Response to Pflugrath
- Next by Date: Re: Image Headers in cif.
- Prev by thread: Re: Response to Pflugrath
- Next by thread: Some suggestions on image data files
- Index(es):

