[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [h5md-user] [EXTERNAL] Re: topology
From: |
Hart, David Blaine |
Subject: |
Re: [h5md-user] [EXTERNAL] Re: topology |
Date: |
Fri, 9 May 2014 16:14:34 +0000 |
> Apart from the attributes, this is what I suggested :-)
>
> To be clear:
>
> time-dependent H5MD element:
>
> <bond_list>
> \-- step [variable]
> \-- time [variable]
> \-- value: Integer [variable][number of items stored][X]
>
> where X is the number of indices that is needed (2 for pairs, etc.)
>
> time-independent
>
> <bond_list>: Integer [number of items stored][X]
>
> The dimension is given by the shape of the dataset. I don't know what "type"
> is supposed to contain.
>
The "type" attribute was a place to put the contents of the list - like "bonds"
or "angles" - that could be a limited set of values, like the "none" and
"periodic" that go in box/boundary. However, module-dependent group structures
would take care of that issue, too. The other concern was that if we call the
element a "bond_list", it might be (probably will be) used for things that
aren't bonds, and we don't want to limit the use or encourage misuse. So
perhaps something like <atom_list> would be clearer. Although that name isn't
terribly clear, either.
> I hope that I understood correctly what both of you meant and I have the
> feeling that the needs (for storing the indices, at least) are similar to all
> of us.
> Additional data would be module dependent.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Pierre
Yup, that is what I meant! :-) Have a great weekend!
David