[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [IMP-dev] pdb patch
- To: Ben Webb <>
- Subject: Re: [IMP-dev] pdb patch
- From: Keren Lasker <>
- Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 15:39:55 -0800
- Cc: IMP developers' list <>
In modeller this data is stored as name, I guess that you know better
the reasons for that - so the conversion is:
2. The atom type could be argued to really be 'name', since, for
example, AT_CG1 and AT_CG2 are both carbon, and this is orthogonal
the CHARMM forcefield type (probably CT2 or CT3).
We should just use what ever is the convention - which I thought was
name, but if not than we can leave it as it is.