Le 30/08/2011 17:44, Noel O'Boyle a écrit :
> Google says that data_global is not part of the official standard but
> it is often used in any case. The thread at
> http://www.mail-archive.com/jmol-users@lists.sourceforge.net/msg07178.html
> tells us what Jmol decided to do: "Bob proposed not to ignore
> data_global blocks, as I suggested,
> but to check if they contained structural data, which is a better
> idea.". If you google some more, you might find some more advice.
Yes, data_global is used so in IUCr journals, so we can go that way
and just issue a warning when finding a "data_global" entry without
crystallographic info.
That should work, at least until some other database/journal/software
decides that data_global is a nice name to put all the crystallographic
data !
Jean, what do you think ? It could also be reasonable to ignore any
data_XXX which has no crystallographic information (no UC, no atoms) ?
Vincent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Special Offer -- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE!
Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better
price-free! And you'll get a free "Love Thy Logs" t-shirt when you
download Logger. Secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsisghtdev2dev
_______________________________________________
OpenBabel-Devel mailing list
OpenBabel-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openbabel-devel
