Closed joaomcteixeira closed 4 years ago
At the moment, not using pdb_wc
for parsing, but BioPython
library as we already have it installed for other services. I think pdb_wc
should be focused on what users at cli level would need, no need to couple it for the moment with the web front-end.
pdb_wc -c
it prints the chain details. The default pdb_wc
prints an overall summary, which I thought was cleaner than having a very long output. Did you mean something different?Ah! I completely missed that.
I suggest changing slightly the documentation, currently it reads:
"Several options are available to produce only partial summaries:"
This only word mislead me. My bad. It led me to think that those options would reduce the default report instead of enhancing or providing more detail for specific sections.
Could we changed it to?:
"Several options are available to produce detailed partial summaries:"
Fixed by #59.
We should also think of a github action to update the webpage automatically..
After #51, we can consider increasing the detail of
the pdb_wc
report to enhance the user experience of both the command-line user as well as the pdb-tools web interface @brianjimenez is developing.If I recall properly, we discussed altogether in the emails that
pdb_wc
could also report, for example, on the chain IDs, residue number ranges and atom ranges. This would facilitate the interaction of the user with the other tools such aspdb_chain
.I take no full credit for this idea, I am just registering an idea discussed by all which I found really interesting.
@brianjimenez how could this be integrated in the web interface? Do you find it useful for
pdb_wc
to do this? Or should it be another tool to do it?I can take this if you all agree with the implementation.