On 06/06/2013 04:11 PM, Patrick Fuller wrote: > Tim, > > I think Dimitri's point is that all the references are implicitly defined > by list indices, rather than explicit keys.
...
> While i somewhat agree with Dimitri's point about the stability associated
> with lost bits (explicit keys will hold up better to a lost comma byte than
> list indices), I also think that it's up to the socket infrastructure to
> validate transmitted data.
You can't validate bugs in someone else's code. Especially if they're
"features". If there are 3 numbers missing, you can't tell if it's a
missing atom (perhaps a side-chain proton they expect you to add?) or 3
different atoms missing one coordinate each.
As far as compact representations go, '{ "CID" : "6324" }' is both more
compact and contains more information: I can urlopen the sdf into OBMol
and get all sorts of data out. Except for the name -- the only way I can
get to the word "ethane" is by generating and inchi string and querying
our own ligand database... but only if the molecule is a PDB ligand.
--
Dimitri Maziuk
Programmer/sysadmin
BioMagResBank, UW-Madison -- http://www.bmrb.wisc.edu
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ How ServiceNow helps IT people transform IT departments: 1. A cloud service to automate IT design, transition and operations 2. Dashboards that offer high-level views of enterprise services 3. A single system of record for all IT processes http://p.sf.net/sfu/servicenow-d2d-j
_______________________________________________ OpenBabel-discuss mailing list OpenBabel-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openbabel-discuss
