I like to think structural biologists are more than just another user
group, they FEED the PDB!
Their needs should first and foremost be taken care off, I would think.
Also, it would indeed be a great loss if legacy programs can not be used
anymore.
- Jeroen -
Clemens Vonrhein wrote:
Th
Hmmm - ccp4bb doesn't allow an attachement ... so script comes here:
-- cut here ---
#!/bin/sh
[ $# -eq 0 ] && echo " ERROR: give some PDB identifier as argument"
type tkdiff >/dev/null 2>&1
[ $? -eq 0 ] && diff=tkdiff || diff=diff
for id in $@
do
i
There is a collection of posts (unfortunately with a number of spam
messages) at
http://wwpdb-remediation.rutgers.edu/mail-archive/
with various comments. Although I'm not familiar with the internal
workings of this remediation program, it seems indeed that the PDB
format is now largely auto-ge
On Saturday 21 July 2007 11:12, Joe Krahn wrote:
> we all use in our daily research. They don't even want to keep the PDB
> format at all. It's primary purpose now is for structural biologists.
That is inevitable. The PDB format is simply not capable of representing
the complexities of current cr
