[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>
- Subject: Re: [Imgcif-l] CBF file templates
- From: "Winter, Graeme (DLSLtd,RAL,DIA)" <Graeme.Winter@Diamond.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 09:45:39 +0100
- In-Reply-To: <20090929061322.N74653@epsilon.pair.com>
- References: <4854F2500EA8C4478A508D2D92973E52047BE339@EXCHANGE25.fed.cclrc.ac.uk><20090929061322.N74653@epsilon.pair.com>
Dear Herbert & list, 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? At the other end, I assume that the contents of the current ADSC CBF header represent the minimum which should be in place for e.g. Mosflm to make sense of the image, and anything we add will be ignored. XDS ignores the header anyway. D*TREK, HKL - any comments? Thanks, Graeme -----Original Message----- From: imgcif-l-bounces@iucr.org [mailto:imgcif-l-bounces@iucr.org] On Behalf Of Herbert J. Bernstein Sent: 29 September 2009 11:34 To: The Crystallographic Binary File and its imgCIF application to image data Subject: Re: [Imgcif-l] CBF file templates Dear Colleagues, Right now the utilities in the library use templates that are intended to be for just one beamline per template, so they are set up with tags with zero values for the items that they know will be populated from the detector and known specific values for the beamline for items that come from the beamline geometry. If we are going to have master templates, there would seem to be more cases: 1. Items that will be supplied by every detector. 2. Items that will be supplied by some detectors but not others 3. Items that will be supplied by every beamline 4. Items that will be supplied by some beamlines but not others I would suggest using "?", rather than "0" values for all items that are know known for sure in writing the master template. Then in specializing for a given beamline (e.g. in setting up the axes), all of the "?" for 3, hopefully a lot for 4 could be removed and replaced with known values. When the detector data is merged with the beam-line specific tempate, hopefully all "?" for 1 and a lot for 2 would be replaced with data from the detector. The "?" that are left would then be clear markers of what was supplied neither by the beamline nor by the detector. I am working on the code to allow comments to be preserved and copied along with data, so we could carry remarks such as: # This item should be supplied by every beamline # This item should be supplied on beamlines ..., ... ... # This item should be supplied by every detector # This item should be supplied by detectors ..., ... ... or is people, prefer, we can add CIF tags with the same info Regards, Herbert ===================================================== Herbert J. Bernstein, Professor of Computer Science Dowling College, Kramer Science Center, KSC 121 Idle Hour Blvd, Oakdale, NY, 11769 +1-631-244-3035 yaya@dowling.edu ===================================================== On Tue, 29 Sep 2009, Winter, Graeme (DLSLtd,RAL,DIA) wrote: > Dear CBF'ers, > > I'm working on trying to establish a "Diamond standard" template for > our CBF files across a number of detectors, and I was wondering how > this is best specified. What would be ideal would be to set up a > template which contains those things that the beamline "knows" but the > detector does not, then have the detector software populate the other fields (e.g. > exposure time, integration time, maximum trusted pixel, oscillation > start / end) to give a full description. > > Now, has anyone done something like this? If so, how do you specify > the fields which are to be replaced? If not, does anyone have an > opinion on how this should be done? > > Thanks, > > Graeme > > Graeme Winter > Software and MX Support Scientist > Diamond Light Source > > +44 1235 778091 (work) > +44 7786 662784 (work mobile) > > > > This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential, copyright > and or privileged material, and are for the use of the intended > addressee only. If you are not the intended addressee or an authorised > recipient of the addressee please notify us of receipt by returning > the e-mail and do not use, copy, retain, distribute or disclose the > information in or attached to the e-mail. > > Any opinions expressed within this e-mail are those of the individual > and not necessarily of Diamond Light Source Ltd. > > Diamond Light Source Ltd. cannot guarantee that this e-mail or any > attachments are free from viruses and we cannot accept liability for > any damage which you may sustain as a result of software viruses which > may be transmitted in or with the message. > > Diamond Light Source Limited (company no. 4375679). Registered in > England and Wales with its registered office at Diamond House, Harwell > Science and Innovation Campus, Didcot, Oxfordshire, OX11 0DE, United > Kingdom > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential, copyright and or privileged material, and are for the use of the intended addressee only. If you are not the intended addressee or an authorised recipient of the addressee please notify us of receipt by returning the e-mail and do not use, copy, retain, distribute or disclose the information in or attached to the e-mail. Any opinions expressed within this e-mail are those of the individual and not necessarily of Diamond Light Source Ltd. Diamond Light Source Ltd. cannot guarantee that this e-mail or any attachments are free from viruses and we cannot accept liability for any damage which you may sustain as a result of software viruses which may be transmitted in or with the message. Diamond Light Source Limited (company no. 4375679). Registered in England and Wales with its registered office at Diamond House, Harwell Science and Innovation Campus, Didcot, Oxfordshire, OX11 0DE, United Kingdom _______________________________________________ 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 (Andy Howard)
- Re: [Imgcif-l] CBF file templates (harry powell)
- References:
- [Imgcif-l] CBF file templates (Winter, Graeme (DLSLtd,RAL,DIA))
- Re: [Imgcif-l] CBF file templates (Herbert J. Bernstein)
- 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):