[aprssig] [RFC] Power Source Data Extension

Kenneth Finnegan kennethfinnegan2007 at gmail.com
Sun Feb 12 15:59:40 EST 2017

On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 5:17 AM, Jason KG4WSV <kg4wsv at gmail.com> wrote:

> Reduction in readability, unnecessary parsing difficulty and
> non-extensibility.

What extensibility is it lacking? New power sources?

Reduction in readability compared to what? I'm proposing this as a
replacement for symbol overlays.

> All fields should be start with either the appropriate APRS data type
> identifier or field separator and end with either a field separator or the
> end of packet.

So if a station capability parser encounters ",PWR=SB&," what should the
parser do with the ampersand?

It seems like you're talking about the tokenizer, which I wasn't talking
about. I'm only talking about how to parse this field. Tokenizing APRS
packets is a kettle of fish I want nothing to do with, because I don't
think you can depend on everyone using field separators in comment fields.

> For status packets and comment fields the field separator is (or should
> be) a space.

It should be, but I think I've seen Bob recommend / as well. Where's the
most relevant documentation on data extension field separators these days?

Kenneth Finnegan, W6KWF
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.tapr.org/pipermail/aprssig_lists.tapr.org/attachments/20170212/70927c19/attachment.html>

More information about the aprssig mailing list