Hmmm…. One wonders how difficult it is to ignore the ‘R’ which is enough in links to non-symmetry-related atoms.
if (line(1:5).eq.'LINKR') line= 'LINK '//line (6:59) PS: does anyone else find that the ‘Major validation issues’ web part on PDBe deposition does not update correctly today? Seems to work on RCSB validation server… From: Eleanor Dodson [mailto:eleanor.dod...@york.ac.uk] Sent: Saturday, December 9, 2017 2:20 PM To: b...@hofkristallamt.org Cc: CCP4BB@jiscmail.ac.uk Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] LINK vs LINKR Yes - I agree about the irritation, but the LINKR record is actally more informative than the LINK LINKR can point to a named LINK which involves angles as well as a distance.. I think LINKR defines a needed coordinate feature but how to get the wwwPDB to accept it??? E On 9 December 2017 at 20:34, Bernhard Rupp <hofkristall...@gmail.com <mailto:hofkristall...@gmail.com> > wrote: Dear Developers, the TER issue in REFMAC seems to be fixed, but is really necessary that REFMAC places LINKR records instead of LINK records in the PDB header? The PDB does not recognize those, and although it’s only a minor nuisance to fix them in an editor, one tends to forget this between revisions…or the PDB could simply ignore the ‘R’…. Best, BR ------------------------------------------------------ Bernhard Rupp <http://www.hofkristallamt.org/> http://www.hofkristallamt.org/ <mailto:b...@hofkristallamt.org> b...@hofkristallamt.org +1 925 209 7429 <tel:(925)%20209-7429> +43 767 571 0536 <tel:+43%207675%20710536> ------------------------------------------------------ Many plausible ideas vanish at the presence of thought ------------------------------------------------------
