CIF-JSON draft standard

[James Hester]

John B asks what the significance of COMCIFS approval would be.  I have
perhaps used the word "approval" rather loosely. By "approval" what I mean
is that (1) COMCIFS endorses the standard and (2) COMCIFS agrees to become
the custodian of standard, that is, to ensure that it is published,
developed and maintained.

A communications standard depends on widespread adoption to be effective.
Having a long-term, credible custodian of a standard is important in
encouraging adoption, as developers are less inclined to write code for
something that is seen as ad-hoc, poorly managed or likely to disappear.

Note that I would be expecting COMCIFS to delegate CIF-JSON development and
maintenance responsibilities back to the cif-developers group.

An alternative to full adoption by COMCIFS could be links (or full
contents) on IUCr webpages and inclusion in Vol G, with appropriate
disclaimers if this seems too much like endorsement.

This topic also touches on the questions around what the relationship of
COMCIFS should be to work on the periphery of IUCr concerns, e.g.
spectroscopy ontologies.

James.


On 24 May 2017 at 23:06, Bollinger, John C <John.Bollinger at stjude.org>
wrote:

> Dear James and Colleages,
>
>
>
> I am satisfied with the current CIF-JSON draft, but I am uncertain what
> the significance of COMCIFS’s approval would be.  Why are we considering
> this step?
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> John
>
>
>
> --
>
> John C. Bollinger, Ph.D.
>
> Computing and X-Ray Scientist
>
> Department of Structural Biology
>
> St. Jude Children's Research Hospital
>
> John.Bollinger at StJude.org
>
> (901) 595-3166 [office]
>
> www.stjude.org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* comcifs [mailto:comcifs-bounces at iucr.org] *On Behalf Of *James
> Hester
> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 23, 2017 8:21 PM
> *To:* Discussion list of the IUCr Committee for the Maintenance of the
> CIF Standard (COMCIFS) <comcifs at iucr.org>
> *Subject:* CIF-JSON draft standard
>
>
>
> Dear COMCIFS,
>
> The cif-developers mailing list has developed a standard for expressing
> CIF information in JSON form.  The resulting draft is available at
> https://comcifs.github.io/cif-json
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcomcifs.github.io%2Fcif-json&data=01%7C01%7CJohn.Bollinger%40stjude.org%7Cfc5e0c10293746b2d08a08d4a2433350%7C22340fa892264871b677d3b3e377af72%7C0&sdata=SjHKghqSXFIZZIkc0%2FkBC26xdE1HZclKjIk7XfVxO%2Bc%3D&reserved=0>
> .
>
>
>
> The discussions around the development of this standard are available in
> the cif-developers archive: http://www.iucr.org/iucr-top/
> lists/cif-developers/
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.iucr.org%2Fiucr-top%2Flists%2Fcif-developers%2F&data=01%7C01%7CJohn.Bollinger%40stjude.org%7Cfc5e0c10293746b2d08a08d4a2433350%7C22340fa892264871b677d3b3e377af72%7C0&sdata=vcW4wMyjdzsxT0UL%2FXdbFrWeo0fNXN51jMaBb8Z16kM%3D&reserved=0>
>
> If no substantial issues are raised here in the next 6 weeks, this
> standard will be considered to have been approved by COMCIFS.  Any
> substantial change to the standard will be routed through the
> cif-developers list (which anybody may join) before being returned here for
> final approval.  I propose that the approval period is reduced to 3 weeks
> for any subsequent drafts.
>
>
>
> James Hester (chair)
>
>
>
> --
>
> T +61 (02) 9717 9907 <+61%202%209717%209907>
> F +61 (02) 9717 3145 <+61%202%209717%203145>
> M +61 (04) 0249 4148
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Email Disclaimer: www.stjude.org/emaildisclaimer
> Consultation Disclaimer: www.stjude.org/consultationdisclaimer
>
> _______________________________________________
> comcifs mailing list
> comcifs at iucr.org
> http://mailman.iucr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/comcifs
>
>


-- 
T +61 (02) 9717 9907
F +61 (02) 9717 3145
M +61 (04) 0249 4148
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.iucr.org/pipermail/comcifs/attachments/20170525/2abff352/attachment-0001.html>