[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Send comment to list owner]
[Reply to list (subscribers only)]
[pdDMG] Duplication of _pd_refln.wavelength_id and_refln.wavelength_id
- To: pddmg@iucr.org
- Subject: [pdDMG] Duplication of _pd_refln.wavelength_id and_refln.wavelength_id
- From: James H via pdDMG <pddmg@iucr.org>
- Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2021 13:08:12 +1100
- Cc: James H <jamesrhester@gmail.com>
Dear Powder DMG,
It has been noted [1] that _pd_refln.wavelength_id and _refln.wavelength_id describe the same thing. I assume that the latter was defined before the former. Are there any objections to formally deprecating the former? Deprecation involves stating that it is deprecated in the textual definition, and setting a machine-readable DDLm attribute accordingly. The data name can never be completely removed, of course.
thanks,
James.
--
T +61 (02) 9717 9907
F +61 (02) 9717 3145
M +61 (04) 0249 4148
F +61 (02) 9717 3145
M +61 (04) 0249 4148
_______________________________________________ pdDMG mailing list pdDMG@iucr.org http://mailman.iucr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pddmg
[Send comment to list owner]
[Reply to list (subscribers only)]
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [pdDMG] Duplication of _pd_refln.wavelength_id and_refln.wavelength_id (Jim Kaduk via pdDMG)
- Prev by Date: Re: [pdDMG] Revised powder dictionaries for multiple phases
- Next by Date: Re: [pdDMG] Duplication of _pd_refln.wavelength_id and_refln.wavelength_id
- Prev by thread: [pdDMG] A standard for presenting complex powder results
- Next by thread: Re: [pdDMG] Duplication of _pd_refln.wavelength_id and_refln.wavelength_id
- Index(es):