What I worry about is the following:
If all the logging programs start creating "Cabrillo" files that don't really
meet the Cabrillo standard, but are accepted because the log-checking
software is appropriately tolerant, then we don't really have a standard.
Actually, we have a standard, but no one is following it.
What if some poor third party wants to create some general log-processing
software that works with the "Cabrillo" file formats from all the logging
progams. He should be able to do this without ever looking at the output
from any of the logging programs, but he can't. Further he can't be sure if
the output for the "Cabrillo" file will change with the next revision of the
software. After all, it's no longer a standard, it's an artistic impression
of the standard.
I think the concept behind the Cabrillo format is great. The standard should
be followed. Files that don't meet the standard should not be called
Cabrillo files. If the standard is vague, it should be clarified and then
utilized.
I would urge all logging program developers to make sure their Cabrillo files
meet the standard.
Bob - W3YY
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/trlog
Submissions: trlog@contesting.com
Administrative requests: trlog-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-trlog@contesting.com
Feature Wishlist: http://web.jzap.com/n6tr/trwish.html
|