. Juli 2020 13:11
An: Schreuder, Herman /DE
Cc: CCP4BB@jiscmail.ac.uk
Betreff: Re: [ccp4bb] AW: [ccp4bb] AW: [EXTERNAL] Re: [ccp4bb] number of frames
to get a full dataset?
EXTERNAL : Real sender is dgwater...@gmail.com<mailto:dgwater...@gmail.com>
Hi Herman,
I started googling and en
are happy with the
> multiplicity/redundancy they grew up with, that is the way it will stay.
>
> Best regards,
> Herman
>
>
>
>
> Von: David Waterman
> Gesendet: Freitag, 3. Juli 2020 10:49
> An: Schreuder, Herman /DE
> Cc: CCP4BB@jiscmail.ac.uk
> Betreff: Re:
t; Best regards,
> Herman
>
>
>
>
> Von: David Waterman
> Gesendet: Freitag, 3. Juli 2020 10:49
> An: Schreuder, Herman /DE
> Cc: CCP4BB@jiscmail.ac.uk
> Betreff: Re: [ccp4bb] AW: [ccp4bb] AW: [EXTERNAL] Re: [ccp4bb] number of
> frames to get a full datas
, that is the way it will stay.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Herman
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Von:* David Waterman
> *Gesendet:* Freitag, 3. Juli 2020 10:49
> *An:* Schreuder, Herman /DE
> *Cc:* CCP4BB@jiscmail.ac.uk
> *Betreff:* Re: [ccp4bb] AW:
way it will stay.
Best regards,
Herman
Von: David Waterman
Gesendet: Freitag, 3. Juli 2020 10:49
An: Schreuder, Herman /DE
Cc: CCP4BB@jiscmail.ac.uk
Betreff: Re: [ccp4bb] AW: [ccp4bb] AW: [EXTERNAL] Re: [ccp4bb] number of frames
to get a full dataset?
EXTERNAL : Real sender is dgwater
cy/multiplicity is not a valid argument against MPR.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Herman
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Von:* CCP4 bulletin board *Im Auftrag von *Ian
> Tickle
> *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 2. Juli 2020 22:06
> *An:* CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
>
MPR.
Cheers,
Herman
Von: CCP4 bulletin board Im Auftrag von Ian Tickle
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 2. Juli 2020 22:06
An: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Betreff: Re: [ccp4bb] AW: [EXTERNAL] Re: [ccp4bb] number of frames to get a
full dataset?
EXTERNAL : Real sender is
owner-ccp...@jiscmail.ac.uk
Well I very much doubt that many software developers are going to trawl
through all their code, comments, output statements & documentation to
change 'redundancy' or 'multiplicity' to 'MPR' or whatever terminology is
agreed on (assuming of course we do manage to come to an agreement, which I
doubt)
Dear all
I’ve been persuaded that MPR is a useful name (and see that there are
shortcomings with both “multiplicity” and “redundancy") and I agree with much
of what’s been said most recently in this thread.
BTW, just because the Physics definition of a measurement/quantity/whatever is
given on
Dear all,
While following the development of this thread, I am truly amazed how people
cling to names for the number of measurements per reflection whose meaning:
* Depends on the cultural/engineering/scientific context
* Can only be understood by experts
* Where the experts, as witn
Dear BB,
Since there does not seem a generally accepted term for the subject of this
discussions, and since even the IUCR scriptures do not give any guidance, I
would propose to introduce a completely new term:
Measurements per reflection or MPR
This term is politically neutral, should adequat
11 matches
Mail list logo
