I don't think anyone is considering archiving all images *as a first step*! I think the obvious first step is to try to get depositors of new structures to the PDB to deposit images at the same time, which to me seems trivially easy and has a reasonably high benefit:cost ratio. Let's just do it, maybe even making it optional at first. I don't even think that in the beginning a common image format would be required--most programs can use multiple formats. Anyway, that could be addressed down the line.
Jacob 2011/10/28 Boaz Shaanan <bshaa...@exchange.bgu.ac.il>: > Hi Jacob, > > There is (very) BIG difference between depositing images for deposited > structures and depositing all images ever recorded by any crystallographer on > the planet. In the case you presented, A and B can settle the issue by > looking at each other's images whether through the database or by exchanging > data on their own initiative or even by writing a note to a journal that they > completely disagree with one another and start a debate (in case one of them > is not willing to exchange images). Besides, I thought that by now there are > some standards on how data should be processed (this has been discussed on > this BB once every few months, if I'm not mistaken). Isn't that part of the > validation process that so many good people have established? Also, to the > best of my knowledge (and experience) referees (at least of some journals) > are instructed to look into those issues these days and comment about them, > aren't they? > > Cheers, > > Boaz > > > Boaz Shaanan, Ph.D. > Dept. of Life Sciences > Ben-Gurion University of the Negev > Beer-Sheva 84105 > Israel > > E-mail: bshaa...@bgu.ac.il > Phone: 972-8-647-2220 Skype: boaz.shaanan > Fax: 972-8-647-2992 or 972-8-646-1710 > > > > > > ________________________________________ > From: CCP4 bulletin board [CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK] on behalf of Jacob Keller > [j-kell...@fsm.northwestern.edu] > Sent: Friday, October 28, 2011 5:05 PM > To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK > Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] raw data deposition > > What about a case in which two investigators have differences about > what cutoff to apply to the data, for example, A thinks that Rsym of > 50 should be used regardless of I/sig, and B thinks that I/sig of 2 > and Rpim should be used. Usually A would cut off the data at a lower > resolution than B, especially with high multiplicity, so B would love > to have the images to see what extra info could be gleaned from a > higher-res cutoff. Or the converse, A is skeptical of B's cutoff, and > wants to see whether the data according to A's cutoff justify B's > conclusion. Don't these types of things happen a lot, and wouldn't > images be helpful for this? > > JPK > -- ******************************************* Jacob Pearson Keller Northwestern University Medical Scientist Training Program email: j-kell...@northwestern.edu *******************************************
