Re: [magCIF] magCIF working group

It appears that considerable work has been done on defining the items that are needed for magCIF, judging by the sample list of proposed datanames I received from Branton.  While the names in this list indicate the information that each data item contains, they each need a proper description so that people like myself who have never worked in the field know what each item represents and can understand the logic behind its inclusion.

I suggest that someone familiar with the field prepare a description for each of these items.  After discussion and amendment these would be incorporated into the new dictionary as the textual description or definition of the item.  The draft description need not be long, but It is important that the final version be precise, ensuring that the item is uniquely defined, and complete, ensuring that anyone reading the description is able to interpret it (e.g., it might include a reference to a detailed discussion of the concept).  These definitions are key to ensuring that the CIF dictionary reflects the logical structure of the discipline, something we often take for granted and do not think about.  Reflecting the logic of the discipline is essential if the dictionary is to evolve.  I am willing to monitor these definitions once they have been written to check the logic and ensure that they are compatible with the structure of CIF.

David