Xrd modification

[RubelMozumder]

1. Dissolve the scattering vector into perpendicular and parallel components (extension).
2. Rename the plot name of two_theta_plot compatible with the ELNXRDDiffraction schema.

[ka-sarthak]

The quantity labels look good to me. I am not sure about the descriptions of the scatter vector components. If you took it from a reputable source, then it's okay, otherwise please check it with an expert in Area B, perhaps Sandor.

[RubelMozumder]

The quantity labels look good to me. I am not sure about the descriptions of the scatter vector components. If you took it from a reputable source, then it's okay, otherwise please check it with an expert in Area B, perhaps Sandor.

q is a scattering vector; therefore, it has components along the dimension of the phase space or vector space. Here, the fields explain, the perpendicular component and parallel components of the scattering vector, the parallel component is important in the Reciprocal Space Mapping technique in the X-ray diffraction domain.

[domna]

I cannot say anything about the scientific reasonability of these fields. From my very limited knowledge of XRD this reads fine though.

I left some comments on how to deal with links. Here is an example how we formulate this in NXmpes.

[domna]

Some more wording suggestions.

Generally, this addresses these points throughout:

• Avoid general phrases as This concept represents .... It is clear that this is explaining the concept and it makes getting the relevant information quickly harder.
• Avoid referring to something as ... this is a link to..., because we cannot enforce linking on the appdef level. We can just suggest to the user to link this data when writing the file. I would therefore suggest to word this as ... this should be linked to... (for same-as concepts) or ... this might be linked to ... (for similar concepts which are the same in some cases but not in others).

You might also want to add some literature which explains the scientific background of, e.g., q-vectors. However, I do believe this is not strictly necessary as we always assume that users of the appdef are also experts in the fields (but it cannot hurt if non-experts can also gain some understanding).

[lukaspie]

I second what @domna commented, some more suggestions

[domna]

Looks good from my side now. Thanks

[lukaspie]

Found one more instance where things can be shortened. Other than that LGTM.

EDIT: there seems to be some intendation problem which prevents the html from being build. Please fix before mergin.