Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemistry/IRC discussions/14 April 2009


 * [2009-04-14 17:22:52]  anybody online?
 * [2009-04-14 17:23:29] * Beetstraway 's remark of 5 minutes ago suggests: yes ;-)
 * [2009-04-14 17:23:51]  checking out Hipposudoric acid now
 * [2009-04-14 17:28:43]  I added 'your' data, but it was rejected .. they did not believe the IUPAC name, and the boiling point is .. strange
 * [2009-04-14 17:28:51]  (prob an extrapolation)
 * [2009-04-14 17:29:04]  I would NOT add predicted properties
 * [2009-04-14 17:32:04]  oh, but a boiling point of >600 degrees for an organic dicarboxylic acid?
 * [2009-04-14 17:32:28]  When we get to 300 degrees C I start wondering for organic compounds
 * [2009-04-14 17:33:01]  The IUPAC name is correct, I think
 * [2009-04-14 17:33:50]  but it looks like mentioning 4 keto-groups, while the molecule has 3 keto and one alcohol group. But I think it is a combination of framework chosen and tautomerisations
 * [2009-04-14 17:33:52]  I'm still trying to find the structure...cannot find it by that name
 * [2009-04-14 17:34:06]  :-)
 * [2009-04-14 17:34:26]  http://www.chemspider.com/9613716
 * [2009-04-14 17:34:36]  someone is hitting the server very hard this morning
 * [2009-04-14 17:34:45]  we'll block them soon...
 * [2009-04-14 17:34:53]  60,000 transacations on the web service
 * [2009-04-14 17:37:17] Hi! Is this the official meeting?  Should we start to talk about the new Chembox generator?  Or should we first deal with the updates to the Chembox (done by PC last week)?
 * [2009-04-14 17:37:42]  I am depositing the IUPAC structure from the article Dirk
 * [2009-04-14 17:38:21] <ChemSpiderman> your call martin
 * [2009-04-14 17:38:50] Are you discussing domoic acid right now?
 * [2009-04-14 17:39:06] <ChemSpiderman> No...hipposudoric acid
 * [2009-04-14 17:40:48] I just sent you a JACS paper on domoic acid 3D structure - I was shocked to see how many papers published just have ambiguous stereochem!
 * [2009-04-14 17:41:16] <ChemSpiderman> See this one: http://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/hab/habs_toxins/marine_biotoxins/da/index.html
 * [2009-04-14 17:41:24] <ChemSpiderman> TOTAL reverse stereo
 * [2009-04-14 17:42:13] <ChemSpiderman> unless my eyes are reversed too
 * [2009-04-14 17:42:18] <ChemSpiderman> it's been a long night...
 * [2009-04-14 17:43:31] <ChemSpiderman> Dirk..try this: http://www.chemspider.com/Chemical-Structure.21474973.html
 * [2009-04-14 17:43:39] <ChemSpiderman> Wikipedia linked and IUPAC publication linked
 * [2009-04-14 17:44:53] <ChemSpiderman> Systematic names linked
 * [2009-04-14 17:45:13] <ChemSpiderman> 5-hydroxy-1,4,8-trioxo-4,8-dihydro-1H-fluorene-3,9-dicarboxylic acid
 * [2009-04-14 17:45:22] <ChemSpiderman> ok Martin...we should continue
 * [2009-04-14 17:46:30] OK, is Physchim62 here?
 * [2009-04-14 17:47:13] (BTW, I think you're right that the noaa.gov site had the stereochem backwards - unless perhaps BOTH enantiomers are known in nature, which happens, as with carvone)
 * [2009-04-14 17:47:14] <ChemSpiderman> guess not
 * [2009-04-14 17:47:51] OK, let's talk about the chembox generator. Have you tried it, Beetstraway ?
 * [2009-04-14 17:48:29] ali_as, have you seen it?
 * [2009-04-14 17:49:31] <ali_as> No.
 * [2009-04-14 17:50:13] Take a look at http://www.chemspider.com/blog/providing-some-structured-support-with-chemspiders-wikipedia-services.html
 * [2009-04-14 17:50:21] <ChemSpiderman> Martin...if I draw domoic acid the way they have it in the paper you sent the stereo is WRONG!
 * [2009-04-14 17:51:31] I've been quite busy but I tried the tool out for sodium periodate, and it works like a dream! I love it!
 * [2009-04-14 17:51:46] <ChemSpiderman> Nice to be appreciated :-)
 * [2009-04-14 17:51:57] So, some issues arise:
 * [2009-04-14 17:52:29] 1. Are there any other features we'd like to plead with ChemSpiderman to add, while we have his attention?
 * [2009-04-14 17:53:11] 2. Do we want it to generate a drawing for us using ACS settings?
 * [2009-04-14 17:53:41] 3. What happens with partially completed chemboxes - can the tool help us with those?
 * [2009-04-14 17:54:10] 4. Should we make this an official part of our style guide/recommended methods?
 * [2009-04-14 17:54:19] I think those four should be enough for now!
 * [2009-04-14 17:54:34] <ChemSpiderman> I'll wait for answers :-)
 * [2009-04-14 17:54:46] Perhaps we should deal with no. 2 first?
 * [2009-04-14 17:55:50] <ChemSpiderman> is there anyone online?
 * [2009-04-14 17:56:13] <ali_as> The tool generates a chembox from a chemspider entry?
 * [2009-04-14 17:56:24] Yes
 * [2009-04-14 17:56:50] <ali_as> Ok, just wondered on the example where the data was coming from.
 * [2009-04-14 17:57:05] <ChemSpiderman> And if you have a "new molecule" you just need to deposit to ChemSpider....
 * [2009-04-14 17:58:56] We currently have ACS settings as our standard, because these settings are available on all the drawing packages that people use. We could consider a switch to ChemSpider settings, but then our chembox structures would look different from the body of our articles.  So I would favour staying with ACS settings.
 * [2009-04-14 17:59:50] <ali_as> I don't understand what is meant by ACS settings?
 * [2009-04-14 18:00:01] <ChemSpiderman> Dammit...looks like somoen is trying to crash our server
 * [2009-04-14 18:00:47] I also like the look of ACS settings, they scale well - that's why we picked ACS settings in the first place
 * [2009-04-14 18:01:10] <ali_as> The molecule projection?
 * [2009-04-14 18:01:42] Most of our drawings on WP use the ACS settings currently - these are settings for bond length, line width, font size and style, etc, which are approved for American Chem Soc publications
 * [2009-04-14 18:01:57] <ali_as> Ahhhhhh.
 * [2009-04-14 18:02:31] <ChemSpiderman> Martin...just used the service to update http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hipposudoric_acid
 * [2009-04-14 18:02:42] <ChemSpiderman> it needs a structure...
 * [2009-04-14 18:03:51] I'm looking for the archived discussion
 * [2009-04-14 18:04:24] on ACS settings. Anyway, we tried lots of different ones - Royal Soc Chem, etc,
 * [2009-04-14 18:05:06] and we liked the look of ACS settings a lot, because they look good small (in complex reaction schemes) and also big.
 * [2009-04-14 18:05:26] <Physchim62> Hi everyone!
 * [2009-04-14 18:05:29] What drawing package do you have access to, ali_as?
 * [2009-04-14 18:05:33] Hi PC!
 * [2009-04-14 18:05:35] <ChemSpiderman> Hi PC
 * [2009-04-14 18:06:21] <ali_as> Chemsketch is the one I used last, anything free essentially.
 * [2009-04-14 18:06:33] <ChemSpiderman> it just got upgraded to version12 by the way http://www.acdlabs.com/download/chemsketch/
 * [2009-04-14 18:06:55] <Physchim62> version12? I'm still on version8 I think!
 * [2009-04-14 18:07:45] <Physchim62> ChemSketch works well for anything I have to do. I have access to others, but frankly I don't use them ;)
 * [2009-04-14 18:08:24] <ChemSpiderman> I'm glad my ten years of managing that product worked out then!
 * [2009-04-14 18:08:30] <Physchim62> The trick (from version8) is to export as TIFF at 300dpm, then convert to PNG
 * [2009-04-14 18:08:49] <ChemSpiderman> in version 12 you can export PNG
 * [2009-04-14 18:08:51] OK, ali_as, go to Options, then Structure drawing style, and you will see ACS settings come up. I use that as default now.
 * [2009-04-14 18:08:59] <ChemSpiderman> Martin..notice...PNG not SVG!
 * [2009-04-14 18:09:04] in Version 11 you can export PNG
 * [2009-04-14 18:09:10] <Physchim62> obviously, if the newer versions have an option to create the 300dpi PNG directly, that would be nice
 * [2009-04-14 18:09:51] <Physchim62> yes, well there are big arguments at WP about PNG vs. SVG
 * [2009-04-14 18:09:52] It was put into ChemSketch because we asked a nice guy at ACD Labs, who listened to us!
 * [2009-04-14 18:10:10] <ChemSpiderman> hmm...I wonder who
 * [2009-04-14 18:10:22] <Physchim62> PNG is "good enough", especially given the problems in creating high-quality chemical SVGs
 * [2009-04-14 18:11:12] <Physchim62> Wikimedia cannot handle the full range of SVG syntax at present: annoyingly, it cannot handle SVG superscripts and subscripts
 * [2009-04-14 18:11:41] <ChemSpiderman> I'm striking "generate SVG" off the list of things to do on ChemSPider
 * [2009-04-14 18:11:49] PNG is what most, but not all chemists put up, and the SVG-zealots have learnt, "Those reactionary chemists just don't understand, but we've found it easier just to leave their silly structures alone or they scream at us a lot"
 * [2009-04-14 18:12:08] But I think a couple of chemists have learnt to do nice SVGs
 * [2009-04-14 18:12:13] so I think it can be done.
 * [2009-04-14 18:12:24] <Physchim62> we can generate standard SVG already with BKchem, but wikimedia can't cope with it
 * [2009-04-14 18:12:37] <ChemSpiderman> I say force PNG.
 * [2009-04-14 18:12:46] <ChemSpiderman> actually...just use it
 * [2009-04-14 18:12:54] <Physchim62> BKchem is free licence BTW, if you want to do SVG generation at ChemSpider
 * [2009-04-14 18:12:55] But Antony, I wouldn't put a lot of effort into making SVGs, if you can do PNG that would be fine for now
 * [2009-04-14 18:13:04] <ChemSpiderman> it works
 * [2009-04-14 18:13:21] I think you have more important things to spend your time on!
 * [2009-04-14 18:13:36] <ali_as> A lot of people have changed pngs into svgs, forcing png in the style guide would upset a lot of people.
 * [2009-04-14 18:14:13] <ChemSpiderman> either should be acceptable
 * [2009-04-14 18:14:19] <ChemSpiderman> the reader can't tell the difference
 * [2009-04-14 18:14:59] <Physchim62> the position in the PNG vs SVG "battle" hasn't changed in the last couple of years, and I don't see it changing in the next couple of years either
 * [2009-04-14 18:15:02] Unless they try to print it, and they find the SVG prints a big black box......!
 * [2009-04-14 18:15:26] <Physchim62> *high-quality* SVGs are fine, but we *prefer* high-quality PNGs over low-quality SVGs
 * [2009-04-14 18:16:21] OK, Physchim62, we were talking about ACS settings when you came
 * [2009-04-14 18:17:03] <Physchim62> ali_as, don't worry, nobody's forcing anything from this side, I'm just stating our current position, a position which has been stable for a couple of years now
 * [2009-04-14 18:17:22] <Physchim62> walkerma, and what's wrong with ACS settings: they seem to work fine for us
 * [2009-04-14 18:17:43] Currently, the new ChemSpider tool generates a structure using ChemSpider settings. They look nice, but they are not our standard - plus they are not a standard option in ChemDraw etc
 * [2009-04-14 18:17:47] <Physchim62> The only point I'd make is to set the PNG settings at 300dpi
 * [2009-04-14 18:18:02] Here's what I said earlier - "We currently have ACS settings as our standard, because these settings are available on all the drawing packages that people use. We could consider a switch to ChemSpider settings, but then our chembox structures would look different from the body of our articles. So I would favour staying with ACS settings."
 * [2009-04-14 18:18:24] Do others concur?
 * [2009-04-14 18:18:37] <Physchim62> Well, I thought CSM said that he could do them at whatever settings we ask them to, so I would ask for standard ACS settings at 300dpi PNG
 * [2009-04-14 18:18:57] <Physchim62> so yes, concur with Martin
 * [2009-04-14 18:19:00] <ChemSpiderman> Yes..it's just more work
 * [2009-04-14 18:19:09] If so, we need to formally request ChemSpiderman to develop something to generate ACS structures - if he has time
 * [2009-04-14 18:19:10] <Physchim62> including the point about not worrying about SVGs
 * [2009-04-14 18:19:13] <ChemSpiderman> so we'll get to it when we have bandwidth
 * [2009-04-14 18:19:17] Right!
 * [2009-04-14 18:19:55] <Physchim62> well, for the time being, we would ask people not to use the structures generated by ChemSpider unless there was no other option
 * [2009-04-14 18:20:14] Agree
 * [2009-04-14 18:20:45] <Physchim62> that's not to criticise the service, which could be very useful for other websites
 * [2009-04-14 18:21:04] <ChemSpiderman> it's built for Wikipedia only
 * [2009-04-14 18:21:21] <Physchim62> however, we are not short of people who can generate structure diagrams on request (often using ChemSketch ;) )
 * [2009-04-14 18:21:24] <ChemSpiderman> who else uses ChemBoxes?
 * [2009-04-14 18:24:16] OK, I had a set of four points listed above, and "ACS settings" was no. 2. The others were (1) More features? (3) Filling out partially completed chemboxes and (4) Adding it into the CHEMMOS.  I think it would be logical to move to no. 3 next, OK?
 * [2009-04-14 18:25:55] <Physchim62> I sort of see the two services as separate, in that the chembox is purely WP-based whereas the structure diagram could be useful to many other people apart from WP
 * [2009-04-14 18:26:21] <ChemSpiderman> The structure is available to everyone using the EMBED functionality
 * [2009-04-14 18:26:39] <ChemSpiderman> it's been there for weeks
 * [2009-04-14 18:26:49] <Physchim62> maybe you should shout loader about that!
 * [2009-04-14 18:26:53] <ChemSpiderman> http://www.chemspider.com/blog/why-are-chemical-structures-like-youtube-videos.html
 * [2009-04-14 18:27:02] <ChemSpiderman> http://www.chemspider.com/blog/how-embedded-chemspider-structures-makes-blogs-searchable.html
 * [2009-04-14 18:27:10] <ChemSpiderman> http://www.chemspider.com/blog/why-are-spectra-like-youtube-videos.html
 * [2009-04-14 18:27:14] <ChemSpiderman> shouting...
 * [2009-04-14 18:27:29] <Physchim62> Can I make two suggestions about the example chembox (domoic acid)?
 * [2009-04-14 18:27:53] <Physchim62> 1) there should be HTML subscript tags in the formula.
 * [2009-04-14 18:28:22] <ChemSpiderman> ok
 * [2009-04-14 18:28:24] <Physchim62> 2) the molar mass should be rounded to two decimal places and be quoted with the units "g/mol"
 * [2009-04-14 18:28:43] <ChemSpiderman> can you send me the list?
 * [2009-04-14 18:29:02] <Physchim62> which list?
 * [2009-04-14 18:29:09] <ChemSpiderman> of things to fix
 * [2009-04-14 18:29:13] <Physchim62> the list of my complaints? ;)
 * [2009-04-14 18:29:17] <Physchim62> OK
 * [2009-04-14 18:29:43] Yes, I'd missed the subscript issue - good point!
 * [2009-04-14 18:29:48] <Physchim62> walkerma, can you email me to remind me to email CSM?!
 * [2009-04-14 18:30:05] Yes, I'll try!
 * [2009-04-14 18:30:11] <Physchim62> A third, very minor, point is the indenting of parameters
 * [2009-04-14 18:31:10] <Physchim62> so, what was the point 4, including this in WP:MOSCHEM?
 * [2009-04-14 18:31:18] Yes
 * [2009-04-14 18:31:27] <ChemSpiderman> sorry...dropped offline
 * [2009-04-14 18:31:35] <ChemSpiderman> send me the list of things to fix
 * [2009-04-14 18:31:40] <Physchim62> will do.
 * [2009-04-14 18:32:14] <Physchim62> Ive only seen one other, very minor point, but an email message is probably more useful than an IRC log ;)
 * [2009-04-14 18:32:35] <ChemSpiderman> yes pelase
 * [2009-04-14 18:32:37] <ChemSpiderman> please
 * [2009-04-14 18:32:41] I think we should add a link to this tool into WP:MOSCHEM once the "bugs" are removed, as a recommended way to generate chemboxes. We should also add a link from the Chembox page as well
 * [2009-04-14 18:33:07] <Physchim62> As *one* way to generate chemboxes
 * [2009-04-14 18:33:14] Yes, not the only way
 * [2009-04-14 18:33:44] <Physchim62> nor "recommended", but not disparaged in any way, just /one/ way
 * [2009-04-14 18:33:59] But for a chemist new to WP, who feels overwhelmed by all the style issues and obscure syntax issues, this tool will be a godsend, IMHO
 * [2009-04-14 18:34:31] Are you OK with that, ali_as ?
 * [2009-04-14 18:34:56] <Physchim62> possibly, but each editor will be different. It shouldn't excuse us from improving the on-wiki documentation of the chembox
 * [2009-04-14 18:35:49] Agreed
 * [2009-04-14 18:35:50] <Physchim62> for example, there are tools to convert Excel files into wikitables: I've never used them, but they are presumably useful to some editors
 * [2009-04-14 18:36:22] Those should be documented- I'd find such things very useful!
 * [2009-04-14 18:36:22] <Physchim62> and what is useful to some editors is generally to be strongly encouraged :)
 * [2009-04-14 18:36:55] <Physchim62> they are documented… somewhere…
 * [2009-04-14 18:37:23] <Physchim62> http://people.fas.harvard.edu/~sdouglas/table.cgi
 * [2009-04-14 18:37:33] <Physchim62> from Help:Table
 * [2009-04-14 18:38:14] <ChemSpiderman> Please help connect me: http://www.chemspider.com/blog/multilingual-support-for-wikipedia-services-on-chemspider.html
 * [2009-04-14 18:38:30] But then how will old hacks like us be able to keep bamboozling the new people? If they have all these whizz bang tools we'll have to resort to "ChemSchmuck shows no understanding of WP:ANAL and WP:WTF issues", he should read WP:MOSABXYQ and ..."
 * [2009-04-14 18:39:04] OK, should we move onto point 3?
 * [2009-04-14 18:39:37] <Physchim62> CSM, will do. ChemSpider is at least as well used among French and German WikiChemists as it is among the anglophones
 * [2009-04-14 18:39:54] <Physchim62> so there shouldn't be any friction there
 * [2009-04-14 18:40:12] <Physchim62> walkerma, OK boss, what was point 3 again?
 * [2009-04-14 18:40:28] So, let's say I have a small Chembox, and I want to expand it to include InChIs etc. BUT, I don't want to lose the MP value and water-solubility data that are already there.  Can this tool help me?
 * [2009-04-14 18:40:46] <Physchim62> yes, but we have to tell people how
 * [2009-04-14 18:41:04] Can you tell ME how?
 * [2009-04-14 18:41:18] (I could muddle through, but is there an easy way?)
 * [2009-04-14 18:41:43] <Physchim62> well *I* would paste the CS chembox into Notepad, then copy-paste the relevant sections into the chembox I wanted expanding
 * [2009-04-14 18:42:12] <ChemSpiderman> that's what I just did with hipposuddoric acid..
 * [2009-04-14 18:42:57] <Physchim62> A simpler way would be if the tool ONLY generated the "Identifiers" section of the chembox, as "section1", and we made it a style guideline to reserve section1 for Identifiers
 * [2009-04-14 18:43:35] <Physchim62> OTOH, that seems a regression as to what CSM wants to do.
 * [2009-04-14 18:44:31] <Physchim62> AFAIK, ChemSpider is only proposing identifiers and the structure diagram as reasonably reliable
 * [2009-04-14 18:45:02] <Physchim62> (which they are, on CS: reasonably reliable, but not perfect)
 * [2009-04-14 18:45:02] That's the sort of thing I'm thinking of - even a newbie should be able to figure it out without a deep knowledge of Chembox layout. How is it a regression?  I think you're right that it is only section 1 stuff.
 * [2009-04-14 18:45:13] <ChemSpiderman> agreed
 * [2009-04-14 18:45:27] <ChemSpiderman> but when people are finding isues let me know
 * [2009-04-14 18:45:36] <ChemSpiderman> can't fix them otherwise.
 * [2009-04-14 18:45:53] <ChemSpiderman> fill in the Comments ..click on the button top RHS
 * [2009-04-14 18:46:31] <Physchim62> well I think that in the long term we could do more, and CSM's example seems to indicate a willingness to do more, but we shouldn't let the perfect be a barrier to the good!
 * [2009-04-14 18:47:16] <ChemSpiderman> in the FUTURE when we have experimental physchem data we can pass that too
 * [2009-04-14 18:47:21] <ChemSpiderman> but not right now...
 * [2009-04-14 18:47:28] ChemSpiderman: Agreed!
 * [2009-04-14 18:47:50] We can add section 2, 3, as we see fit
 * [2009-04-14 18:47:58] <Physchim62> I would still love to get a database of safety information together — I have a personal one, but nothing that's publishable — but the safety rules are changing faster than I can keep up for the moment
 * [2009-04-14 18:48:07] But for now keep it just as the identifiers
 * [2009-04-14 18:48:35] <Physchim62> OK
 * [2009-04-14 18:49:08] OK, I think that leads us nicely to point 1, what other features do we want in the short term?
 * [2009-04-14 18:49:16] <Physchim62> I'll email CSM with any minor points and comments
 * [2009-04-14 18:49:38] <Physchim62> What do we want? Anything we can get!
 * [2009-04-14 18:49:56] He hasn't got any money, so don't bother asking him
 * [2009-04-14 18:50:34] I think PC earlier mentioned something that may be important - other language WPs. What sort of Chemboxes do they use?  How would those be formatted?
 * [2009-04-14 18:50:56] <Physchim62> In which case, I would like CS to continue curating its database, especially for multiple entries
 * [2009-04-14 18:51:04] http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domoins%C3%A4ure for example
 * [2009-04-14 18:51:39] <ChemSpiderman> I'd prefer that people HELP me curate our database and let me know when they see issues. :-)
 * [2009-04-14 18:51:48] <Physchim62> I will take a look at those: the entries are formatted similarly to those on enwiki
 * [2009-04-14 18:51:57] http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vorlage:Infobox_Chemikalie
 * [2009-04-14 18:52:21] Looks ugly, IMHO, looks like en:WP ca 2004!
 * [2009-04-14 18:53:23] <Physchim62> some languages (eg, Arabic, Chinese) have taken on our chembox totally: others have evolved their chemboxes from similar principles
 * [2009-04-14 18:54:03] <Physchim62> the German chembox looks like a 2004 enwiki chembox because it was that that it evolved from!
 * [2009-04-14 18:55:05] OK, Physchim62, can you report back on de, fr, es and let us know? Perhaps we can ask Wim about nl, Rifleman about zh and Malay, and I'll ask my Polish chemist friend about pl?
 * [2009-04-14 18:55:49] <Physchim62> I can do nl and jp as well: pl is important, as is se
 * [2009-04-14 18:56:09] At the same time - we should also ask if these languages want to link their CAS nos. to Common Chemistry - we can kill 2 birds with 1 stone
 * [2009-04-14 18:56:15] <Physchim62> what do you want me to report back on?
 * [2009-04-14 18:57:18] How their chemboxes are laid out - parameter names. I'm just thinking, if all those German chemists are using ChemSpider, do we want them to be able to generate a German chembox on CS?
 * [2009-04-14 18:57:38] <Physchim62> I can tell you straight away that all those wikipedias have chemboxes which are transcluded, ie that they could benefit from the ChemSpider service
 * [2009-04-14 18:58:09] Would ChemSpiderman be able to write/link different versions of the one tool?
 * [2009-04-14 18:58:30] <ChemSpiderman> yes..we would allow people to select the language
 * [2009-04-14 18:58:39] <ChemSpiderman> then create a DE version
 * [2009-04-14 18:59:02] I'm guessing it would mainly involve changing parameter names e.g., CASnumber =>CASnummer etc
 * [2009-04-14 18:59:11] <ChemSpiderman> See this: http://www.chemspider.com/blog/multilingual-support-for-wikipedia-services-on-chemspider.html
 * [2009-04-14 18:59:30] <ChemSpiderman> exactly...
 * [2009-04-14 18:59:44] <ChemSpiderman> I want someone to write the mapping into different languages for me
 * [2009-04-14 18:59:51] Wow, I hadn't seen that yet!
 * [2009-04-14 18:59:56] <Physchim62> basically, yes, but there might be structural changes as well. I think that, so far, only Arabic, has followed our modular structure for example
 * [2009-04-14 18:59:57] <ChemSpiderman> we'll map it but we need the translations
 * [2009-04-14 19:00:29] <Physchim62> it's not a huge problem: if there's a choice of languages, there's a choice of structures for the parameters
 * [2009-04-14 19:01:02] OK, I have a student here for a 1pm appointment, so I'll have to go. Are there any other features we want to beg for?  (I'll take answers off the air!)
 * [2009-04-14 19:01:06] <Physchim62> the translations are fairly easy to get, just don't ask for them tonight!
 * [2009-04-14 19:01:17] <ChemSpiderman> no rush
 * [2009-04-14 19:01:18] <ChemSpiderman> bye all
 * [2009-04-14 19:01:22] <Physchim62> TTFN
 * [2009-04-14 19:01:39] <ChemSpiderman> Martin..I sent you the domoic acid PNG
 * [2009-04-14 19:02:46] <Physchim62> Beetstraway, are you there?
 * [2009-04-14 19:53:28] <ali_as> While people are still here are we any closer with the cascite changes?
 * [2009-04-14 19:56:07] I think that's a question for Beetstra
 * [2009-04-14 19:56:28] <Beetstraway> You're lucky .. just here :-)
 * [2009-04-14 19:56:46] <Beetstraway> reply to above question: no did not try the chembox generator
 * [2009-04-14 20:07:38] <Beetstraway> cascite changes: which?
 * [2009-04-14 20:07:54] <Beetstraway> (sorry, fighting with Abd about cold fusion in the mean time .. )
 * [2009-04-14 20:08:10] <ali_as> Haha.
 * [2009-04-14 20:08:31] <ali_as> The way cascite is referenced particually for CAS_Other entries.
 * [2009-04-14 20:10:06] <Physchim62> like the ones which are listed at WT:CHEMBOX
 * [2009-04-14 20:15:23] <ali_as> I can see the commonchemistry comment but I'm not sure that covers what I'm thinking of.
 * [2009-04-14 20:15:29] <ali_as> Darn, phone again.
 * [2009-04-14 20:18:08] I'm guessing there are two issues here (correct me if I'm wrong). (1) Is a link to Common Chemistry sufficient for a "reliable source" or do we want some sort of formal citation in the refs.
 * [2009-04-14 20:18:18] <Beetstraway> Ah, I had that remark also on my talkpage
 * [2009-04-14 20:18:21] <Beetstraway> My thoughts:
 * [2009-04-14 20:18:37] <Beetstraway> 1) linking all is not our problem, CAS will just get more hits
 * [2009-04-14 20:18:44] (2) There is the issue you allude to, which is - what do we do where there are multiple CASnos in one chembox
 * [2009-04-14 20:18:45] <Beetstraway> 2) if CAS thinks about it, they:
 * [2009-04-14 20:18:58] <Beetstraway> a) repair ones which do not exist
 * [2009-04-14 20:19:14] <Beetstraway> b) keep a log of those which are popular, and add them to their site
 * [2009-04-14 20:19:31] <Beetstraway> conclusion: I really don't care that we link wrong ones!
 * [2009-04-14 20:19:46] <ali_as> Hahahahaha.
 * [2009-04-14 20:19:55] <ali_as> Devious.
 * [2009-04-14 20:20:34] <ali_as> I was thinking of Martin's #2. Till now with the manual verify we have just been adding comments to the chembox to let people know which are verified.
 * [2009-04-14 20:20:52] <ali_as> But this is pretty hopeless in the long run and this is quite a common problem.
 * [2009-04-14 20:23:10] Beetstraway: Can you think how to solve this?
 * [2009-04-14 20:26:13] I think this is one reason why the validation work is stalled - until we can solve this.
 * [2009-04-14 20:28:52] <Beetstraway> Hmmm
 * [2009-04-14 20:29:24] <Physchim62> Beetstraway, if you can move Template:Chmebox Identifiers/Sandbox over Template:Chembox Identifiers, we can have up to ten linked CAS numbers
 * [2009-04-14 20:29:25] <Beetstraway> I would say, keep the ones properly verified, the rest can go ..
 * [2009-04-14 20:29:42] <Physchim62> and it will only link the ones which are properly verified
 * [2009-04-14 20:29:46] <Beetstraway> We might have to adapt the template a bit for that (think it is possible already, CASOther)
 * [2009-04-14 20:29:55] <Beetstraway> nah, the others are not in that box
 * [2009-04-14 20:30:06] <Beetstraway> The ones we did not yet verify we just keep ..
 * [2009-04-14 20:30:22] <Physchim62> which others? CASOthers is included, but the links wont work
 * [2009-04-14 20:30:51] <Physchim62> the ones which aren't verified are kept, but not linked and bolded
 * [2009-04-14 20:32:18] <Beetstraway> CASOthers should have e.g. ", ", where these templates produce the same link
 * [2009-04-14 20:33:46] <Physchim62> There is no Template:Chembox CASOther
 * [2009-04-14 20:34:14] <Physchim62> it goes as an argument to [[Template:Chembox CASNo
 * [2009-04-14 20:34:17] <Physchim62> ]]
 * [2009-04-14 20:36:41] <Physchim62> *IF* the change goes ahead, we would have CASNo2, CASNo3, CASNo4 etc as possible parameters for, each of them with a possible link to commonchemistry.org
 * [2009-04-14 20:41:42] <Physchim62> there would also be parameters CASNO_Note, CASNo2_Note etc to explain what each number signifies without breaking the links
 * [2009-04-14 20:42:01] <Physchim62> CASNo_Note, sorry
 * [2009-04-14 20:46:02] <Beetstraway> I would say, too confusing
 * [2009-04-14 20:46:37] <Beetstraway> I would say: one CAS -> use CASNo
 * [2009-04-14 20:47:49] <ali_as> Phone again, back now.
 * [2009-04-14 20:48:07] <ali_as> CASNo2 etc sounds good.
 * [2009-04-14 20:51:45] Physchim62: That sounds perfect. We can have multiple validated CAS nos, and also keep unvalidated CAS nos (i.e., ones not on the Common Chemistry website), but they will show up as unbolded
 * [2009-04-14 20:52:55] <Physchim62> one CASRN = CASNo, as now; the second gets labelled as CASNo2 (although CASOther will continue to work) etc
 * [2009-04-14 20:53:52] Beetstraway: Can we implement this?
 * [2009-04-14 20:59:55] <Beetstraway> hmm .. I would suggest using sub-templates on CASOther .. for CASNo1 - n .. how big must n be .. CASOther can have an almost indefinite number ..
 * [2009-04-14 21:02:57] <ali_as> How does chembox handle multtple images, is there a limit?
 * [2009-04-14 21:07:20] <Physchim62> yes, there's a limit
 * [2009-04-14 21:08:08] <Physchim62> and  have capacity for ten CASRNs, I think that's more than sufficient
 * [2009-04-14 21:08:36] <Physchim62> if not, they can be extended