Instrument manufacturers typically provide a proprietary format for the data produced on their equipment. It is up to the individual company to decide on the amount of release of information about the format. Exchangeable data formats are often welcomed as they provide easy access and portability. They can eliminate the need for individual data import and export functions. The main problems with most proposed data formats has been the speed at which these develop and that rate at which they spread through the community. Unfortunately they tend to lag behind instrument and methods development. JCAMP can serve as a typical example. The current JCAMP5.0 standard does not support anything beyond 1D NMR, where NMR itself has evolved to nD NMR, with n typically =< 4. The XML universe is representing another example where an instrument manufacturer or software provider is now given the choice of supporting XML, CML, ANIML or GAML or any combination thereof. The dilemma rests in the decision what to support. Acceptance in the community can often not be used as a criterion, as many of these formats and standards have little acceptance. The lack of acceptance in turn slows down development.

Long wait for exchangeable data formats vs. the evolution of data

246th National Meeting (2013)

The official archive and repository for all ACS Meetings & Expositions abstracts and select posters or presentations.