Axel Huebl

also affects wording for the ordering of `gridSpacing`, etc

> I am not aware of any reader that currently checks this attribute We do in manual post-processing from time to time. > Does the openPMD validator check the proton...

Thank you for raising this. We introduced the clarification in openPMD 1.1 to ease readers, but the choice should indeed be considered a defect. It's easier to check for existence...

@DavidSagan started developing this extension in https://github.com/DavidSagan/openPMD-standard/tree/extension-accelerator 👍

After correspondence with all contributors to this extension end of last year, we found the extension shall be called `BeamPhysics` (short and descriptive).

VC today: we will address this in it's whole at the end of the 2.0.0 merge window to see what is still missing or lately-defined to improve structure and readability.

@ChristopherMayes posted in https://github.com/openPMD/openPMD-standard/pull/193#discussion_r188371209: > BTW, I see a few REAL8 mentioned, but this word isn't actually standard (Neither is real(8)) in Fortran. Fortran 2008 provides standard kinds: REAL32, REAL64,...

> Since floating point numbers includes integers [...] No, in computer science floating point and integer representations are very different. Floats are not the superset of ints and also not...

We are just explicit and sometimes we actually need ints only, e.g. for number offsets in (particle) patches or snapshot (iteration) numbers.

I would like keeping it explicit but we could add a definition for *(anything)* that includes *all of the above* and use it. But then, anything is not a string...