[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Reply to: [list | sender only]
Re: [Imgcif-l] CBF file templates
- To: "The Crystallographic Binary File and its imgCIF application to image data" <imgcif-l@iucr.org>, "The Crystallographic Binary File and its imgCIF application to image data" <imgcif-l@iucr.org>
- Subject: Re: [Imgcif-l] CBF file templates
- From: "Chris Nielsen" <cn@adsc-xray.com>
- Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 15:33:24 -0700
- References: <4854F2500EA8C4478A508D2D92973E52047BE339@EXCHANGE25.fed.cclrc.ac.uk><20090929061322.N74653@epsilon.pair.com><4854F2500EA8C4478A508D2D92973E52047BE33D@EXCHANGE25.fed.cclrc.ac.uk><alpine.DEB.1.10.0909301010360.31750@agni.phys.iit.edu>
Hi All, I tend to agree that a complete filling-in of the nominal template is probably not going happen in many places, at least to start, but I would suggest that if the DLS beamlines do a good job of it and the "extra" (beyond essential data processing header items) turn out to be useful for this or that, more beam lines will do a more complete job. I'd note that these items should be sort of "backward compatible" in the sense that, to start with, if you only fill in a few "extra" items it should not matter that a future header has more complete information. It's hard to see the downside in this. Graeme: What are your thoughts on the coding required to do this? Have you made an attempt yet? Chris ________________________________ From: imgcif-l-bounces@iucr.org on behalf of Andy Howard Sent: Wed 9/30/2009 8:13 AM To: The Crystallographic Binary File and its imgCIF application to image data Subject: Re: [Imgcif-l] CBF file templates Hi folks, > One template per beamline is probably, in reality, the way it would > work. We would just make sure that they are all the same. Adding ???? > For the detector software to fill in sounds like good sense. Is this > kind of thing supported? An alternative is to have some boiler plate > which needs to be copied in, then work on getting the format for the > detector produced bit the same. These are essentially the same problem. > > What's the consensus on the best approach? Does everyone support the use > of templates? > ... I support templating, but compliance is likely to be an issue. When Jim Pflugrath deliberately put in-your-face comments into the D*Trek "comments" header slots that were designed to force beamlines to customize their local implementations, seveal of the beamlines that used D*Trek ignored those comments. So a lot of D*Trek-aquired data have comments fields that contain language like "This is a meaningless header that should be replaced by something with content". _____________________________________________________________ / Andrew J.Howard, Associate Professor of Biology and Physics \ | CSRRI, Biological, Chemical, & Physical Sciences Department | | College of Science&Letters, Illinois Institute of Technology| | 3101 South Dearborn Street, Chicago Illinois 60616 USA | | Co-director, IIT Masters in Health Physics program | | phone: 312-567-5881; fax: 312-567-3576; cell 773-368-5067 | | e-mail: howard@iit.edu; web: http://csrri.iit.edu/~howard/ | \____________________________________________________________/ _______________________________________________ imgcif-l mailing list imgcif-l@iucr.org http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/imgcif-l _______________________________________________ imgcif-l mailing list imgcif-l@iucr.org http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/imgcif-l
Reply to: [list | sender only]
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [Imgcif-l] CBF file templates (Graeme.Winter)
- References:
- [Imgcif-l] CBF file templates (Winter, Graeme (DLSLtd,RAL,DIA))
- Re: [Imgcif-l] CBF file templates (Herbert J. Bernstein)
- Re: [Imgcif-l] CBF file templates (Winter, Graeme (DLSLtd,RAL,DIA))
- Re: [Imgcif-l] CBF file templates (Andy Howard)
- Prev by Date: Re: [Imgcif-l] CBF file templates
- Next by Date: Re: [Imgcif-l] CBF file templates
- Prev by thread: Re: [Imgcif-l] CBF file templates
- Next by thread: Re: [Imgcif-l] CBF file templates
- Index(es):