Forums

I don't believe a more complicated formula is ever needed at least for
any purpose that I can imagine.

Chris

On Sep 12, 2009, at 2:49 AM, Michael Hucka wrote:

>>>>>> On 9 Sep 2009, "Chris J. Myers" <myers@ece.utah.edu> wrote:
> myers> This is why I suggest adding a number to the group
> myers> association. So you could have a group CIt with
> myers> species CI and CI2. CI would be associated with
> myers> group CIt with value 1 and CI2 would be associated
> myers> with group CIt with value 2.
>
> But ... is it guaranteed that in all cases, it will be a
> simple sum over products of number*id? Isn't it possible
> that in some cases the combination needs a more complicated
> formula? (The answer may be no -- I don't know.)
>
> MH
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> To manage your sbml-discuss list subscription, visit
> https://utils.its.caltech.edu/mailman/listinfo/sbml-discuss
>
> For a web interface to the sbml-discuss mailing list, visit
> http://sbml.org/Forums/
>
> For questions or feedback about the sbml-discuss list,
> contact sbml-team@caltech.edu

____________________________________________________________
To manage your sbml-discuss list subscription, visit
https://utils.its.caltech.edu/mailman/listinfo/sbml-discuss

For a web interface to the sbml-discuss mailing list, visit
http://sbml.org/Forums/

For questions or feedback about the sbml-discuss list,
contact sbml-team@caltech.edu