Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

nist #29

Open
eduardszoecs opened this issue Sep 22, 2015 · 3 comments
Open

nist #29

eduardszoecs opened this issue Sep 22, 2015 · 3 comments
Labels
data source New data source

Comments

@eduardszoecs
Copy link
Member

http://webbook.nist.gov/chemistry/cas-ser.html

@eduardszoecs
Copy link
Member Author

Related #154

@stitam stitam added enhancement New feature or enhancement data source New data source and removed Feature enhancement New feature or enhancement labels Jan 5, 2020
@Aariq
Copy link
Collaborator

Aariq commented Jun 4, 2020

  1. Feasibility. There is no API. Scraping not explicitly disallowed, although some features (e.g. mass spectra) are available in paid software I belive, so we might not want to scrape everything. Most data is presented in table form making scraping somewhat easy.

  2. Scope. There is a ton of information, but most is experimental chemical properties with citations. Not all datasets exist for all compounds. Examples of properties:

  • thermochemistry data
  • phase change data
  • reaction thermochemistry (reaction search allows search for reactants and products together)
  • fluid properties
  • identifiers
  • synonyms
  • mol file for structure
  • IR spectra
  1. Overlap. Certainly provides at least some properties not found in other databases in webchem. My suggestion would be to treat each property type as an individual database and not try to integrate more than one feature at a time. nist_ri() is already implemented. The reaction search is probably the most unique thing, so that might be something to work on next?

@stitam
Copy link
Contributor

stitam commented Jun 6, 2020

From the traceability perspective it's great that they have references to original publications. Ideally every single number in every database should be traceable to the original publication.

I agree to treat each property separately, we can always create an intergrator function later to reduce the number of exported functions. Reactions (similarly to QSAR models discussed earlier) open up the scope of the package quite a bit, I am ok with it, @andschar what do you think?

Given that there is no API, I think it would be best to ask for explicit approval to be safe. I will contact NIST about this.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
data source New data source
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants