*** For details on how to be removed from this list visit the *** *** CCP4 home page http://www.ccp4.ac.uk ***
Hi Phil et al: Maybe its because I am still mired in that part of my career where I am more worried about getting people interested in our work and to establish a reputation that I am about someone stealing our results, but I think it is in my best interest to make our data available in as many ways and as many user-friendly forms as possible, so typically now in addition to submitting coordinates and Fobs I make a web page that has links to the pdb, our experimental phases and MIR or MAD map (as a pymol saved session), a jmol display, and a quick guide to the structure. In other words, don't under-estimate the power of peer-pressure (especially when applied via peer review of papers and grants). We've seen major changes in the access policy for the literature in the last few years in response to pressure and example from the NIH and the PLOS. We've seen major changes in how software is distributed in response to pressure and example from the GNU Free Software Foundation and the Opensource community. Most people in my generation and younger crystallographers are under the impression that if you don't make your data available, people will assume you have something to hide. So peer pressure works at least to some extent. I still don't understand why showing coordinates and a map to referees of a paper is such a big deal. I've occasionally had referees thank me for this, and I like to think it helps the case for publication (and is another chance for someone to spot an error while it is still easy to fix). Bill Phil Evans wrote: > *** For details on how to be removed from this list visit the *** > *** CCP4 home page http://www.ccp4.ac.uk *** > > > > I would guess that there is a consensus (possibly with a very few > dissenters) that it should be part of the deposition, but that nobody > knows how to change the current rules. > > 1) publishers don't care but will respond to the community > 2) grant-awarding bodies don't know so won't apply any pressure > 3) IUCR might be able to do something, but it may be that the > initiative should come from wwPDB, I don't know > > I do know that it has been discussed at many meetings but nobody > seemed to know how to change things > > I suspect the main reason for not depositing structures factors is > laziness. But there is always a little suspicion that there is > something to hide ... > > Phil >
