On Thu, Apr 28, 2011, dcerutti.rci.rutgers.edu wrote:
> Perhaps a good response to this naming problem would be to put some
> information in chapter 1 or 2 of the manual concerning all of these force
> fields.
Well, to me this sounds like what is already in Chapter 2 of the Users'
Manual, and the existing table in Section 2.1. Of course, we can/should
expand and clarify the information that is there, and maybe make citations
easier. Errors and limitations in Chap. 2 are mostly mine, but (in my
defense) I had trouble getting people who know more than I do to contribute.
The type "(ff, ua, pol) + year + group" type of id seems also like a good
idea, so that the name is not just a number or fingerprint, but conveys some
useful information.
....dac
_______________________________________________
AMBER-Developers mailing list
AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
Received on Thu Apr 28 2011 - 15:00:02 PDT
