>>Concerning the behaviour with 19-17, I would say it is the same as 17-19. >>It may be easier to write scripts >> > > I think select 17-19 should work irregardless of the order of residues in > the pdb file.
OK > select 19-17 should not work anywhere because it doesn't make sense. :-) There are pdb files where the residue 'numbers' count down. So I think that it does make sense ... it is the order in the file. > plus it is too easy (for scripters) to make sure your select command puts > the biggest number last. Don't forget ... they are not numbers. This is a valid sequence 1 2 3 1a 1b 1c 4 > fwiw, the pdb spec does not disallow unordered residues in the list: > > " > In most cases, the amino acids that comprise a protein are numbered > sequentially starting with 1. However, there are a number of situations > that may give rise to different numbering schemes > " Correct, so in the general case they are not ordered. And when combined with the insertion codes they are not numbers. Miguel ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf _______________________________________________ Jmol-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jmol-users
