Discussion paper on allowing redefinition of datanames in CIF
jamesrhester at gmail.com
Wed Dec 14 23:17:58 GMT 2016
There having been no objections (or indeed response) to the discussion
paper, I'll transfer it to our technical group (ddlm-group) for development
into a formal set of datanames and definitions.
On 9 December 2016 at 15:38, James Hester <jamesrhester at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear COMCIFS,
> In the process of preparing the DDLm version of the modulated structures
> dictionary, it came to my attention that this dictionary nowhere defines a
> dataname to hold the new model structure factor. This turns out to lead to
> a more fundamental issue involving most dictionaries, and requires some
> sort of resolution from this group. I have written a discussion paper to
> get us started which I've placed at
> The key proposal is to allow dictionaries to redefine datanames as long as
> the old meaning can be viewed as a special case of the new meaning. A new
> dataname to flag redefinitions is included.
> It would be great if any of you with an interest in describing experiments
> not covered by core CIF (magnetism, modulation, twinning, multipole,
> polarisation, powder, electron microscopy,...) could consider these issues
> and provide feedback, corrections and improvements. Note that this is not
> particularly CIF-specific.
> Once the opinion of this group is clear, we can delegate the detailed work
> to the DDLm-group after which a formal proposal would return here for
> T +61 (02) 9717 9907 <+61%202%209717%209907>
> F +61 (02) 9717 3145 <+61%202%209717%203145>
> M +61 (04) 0249 4148
T +61 (02) 9717 9907
F +61 (02) 9717 3145
M +61 (04) 0249 4148
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the comcifs