Absolutely:
1) Make things explicit, please. Daniel's suggestion is right. 2) And use the International System, please. No paper is accepted if the units are not in the IS, so I don't see any reason not to use them. Other units should be secondary.
Javi
2009/5/14 Ben Webb ben@salilab.org
> Daniel Russel wrote: > > Should we establish an explicit rule in IMP that all distances are in > > angstroms? The range of scales is small enough that we don't have > > accuracy issues for doing this. In addition, we then don't have to worry > > about some things being in nanometers (since we have no way of tagging > > things with units). > > > > Ben already established a convention of having units if kCal/MolAngstrom > > for derivative quantities. So angstroms fits with that. > > I see no reason to force people to use any particular unit, if they > really wanted to measure everything in some ridiculous unit like yards > (I apologize on behalf of the English for saddling the US with the > Imperial system). But it makes sense for it to be explicit that by > default we deal in angstroms, rather than implicit as it is now. > > Ben > -- > ben@salilab.org http://salilab.org/~ben/http://salilab.org/%7Eben/ > "It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data." > - Sir Arthur Conan Doyle > _______________________________________________ > IMP-dev mailing list > IMP-dev@salilab.org > https://salilab.org/mailman/listinfo/imp-dev >