|
From: | Felix Höfling |
Subject: | Re: [h5md-user] box data as part of trajectory/position |
Date: | Mon, 19 Nov 2012 19:44:42 +0100 |
User-agent: | Opera Mail/12.02 (Linux) |
Hi all, My subscription to the h5md-user list was disabled in August, due to the removal of an old email address. I have caught up with the list: On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 12:01:12PM +0200, Felix Höfling wrote:Peter and Olaf: are you still following the list? Do you have an opinion on that?I suggest the box information remains in /observables/box. I see no benefit from moving it to /trajectory, other than rendering existing simulation files incompatible with H5MD. I accept Pierre's earlier motivation that box is a macroscopic property. Peter
Hi Peter,It's not so much about whether box is a macroscopic property or part of the trajectory data. My suggestions supports both views as the box data may equally exist in /observables and /trajectory.
The main motivation is the issue with potentially different sampling intervals of different particle groups, which remains unresolved if only a single box group is stored. In my proposal, the box information relevant for each snapshot of a particle group is stored, ensuring data consistency and simplifying the access of particle coordinates. Further, it avoids dependencies across different root groups.
I think these 3 benefits deserve reconsideration of your opinion. We should try making the H5MD data structures as clear and generic as possible with simple solutions for reading and writing.
BTW, if your old files shall be read by a future H5MD reader that expects the box information in trajectory, you may simply add a link from trajectory to observables. Such links are part of the proposal.
Felix
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |