>On a side note we also looked at HKL, Mosflm, XDS processing of data, >we observed differences in the ability of e.g. Shelx to locate SeMet >sites depending on the processing program you used. Of course perfect >data was undistinguishable, but some datasets which were more tricky >to process showed significant differences in locating the SeMet >positions. In those cases XDS was better. This is of course running >all programs with their default parameters and not tweaking them.
Has this (or anything like this) been published? It may be interesting to look at this in a systematic way. You often hear that certain data processing packages are better than others for problematic datasets, but I have never found anything concrete about this. Bert
