More examples of incorrect nomenclature

[arouinfar]

In #149 we discovered that the database had an incorrect entry for ethenone. Since that issue contained some tangential discussion, @Denz1994 and I decided to open a new issue to document other examples. There are more than 9000 named molecules in otherMoleculesData.js, and it's unreasonable to check them all by hand. However, a good rule of thumb would be for QA to cross-reference the pubchem database whenever they encounter a named molecule they are unfamiliar with.

This structure is not butane (C4H10). @Denz1994 confirmed there is error in otherMoleculeData.js which begins with butane|C4H9|137553|...

(As a side note the 3rd datapoint in the entry is the PubChem CID, which reveals this entry belongs to 2-butyl radical. This echos a bit of #150).

[Denz1994]

The entry for C4H9|Butane was removed. The PubChem entry for Butane includes an alternate listing for Butane as C4H10|n-Butane, which is currently being used.

I think #148 needs to be fixed before we can create it though. I was only able to create isobutane.

[Denz1994]

Also worth noting, the full source of molecules can be found here:
Collection Molecules and Other Molecules

The Collection Molecules data is formated so it is read like so:
moleculeName|generalFormula|compoundCID|2d3dOrBoth|totalAtoms|totalBonds|{Element n xyz}.

You can navigate the data set with a search for the {moleculeName}| for example.

[arouinfar]

@Denz1994 we should have two entries for C4H10: n-butane and isobutane. The Java sim currently handles both cases correctly. The C4H9 entry for butane is the incorrect one.

[Denz1994]

@Denz1994 we should have two entries for C4H10: n-butane and isobutane. The Java sim currently handles both cases correctly. The C4H9 entry for butane is the incorrect one.

Confirmed in otherMoleculesData.js we have both n-butane and isobutane as C4H10.

[Denz1994]

It was discussed during the design meeting on 01/31/20:

We haven't gotten reports of problematic molecules. We should leave up to users to report on any molecules that are incorrect. QA shouldn't have to check against each molecule for its existence.

[Denz1994]

@ariel-phet mentioned:

If QA finds an obvious problem with the name of a molecule that is built during testing, then it should be reported. But other than that we will defer to user reports.

I will close this issue and any erroneous molecules that are noted during testing a separate issue should be opened. Closing this issue.