[TangerineSDR] Filename structure, Node info contents, other stuff to ponder

Tue May 5 22:04:10 EDT 2020

Rob,

Thank You for the feedback!

Yes, the ISO date in the filename is for that UTC days data - will mod the
doc to reflect that.

I stayed away from . and - in the filename as Windows users would get into
trouble here (I stuck to just the _ char) and I think we have to cater to
that limitation of Windows 7/10/whatever.

For the RasPi OS (Linux), I use a system call to define ~ which is the BASE
of the user's directory structure (root was a BAD choice here - not
intended to confuse it with root user)

ALL Node numbers are real nodes (except N00000) like the rest of the higher
numbered ones - I just allocated 1-99 for the development team(s) use to
help set them apart visually

I originally defined nodes 1-49 for the low cost PSWS and 51-99 for the
high cost PSWS, with 50 being the test case for the high cost PSWS. I may
throw that back in and see what shakes out.

This will be available online when we get it into version control.

Thanks for your help and I will send out v0.03 shortly.

John N8OBJ

John C. Gibbons
Director - Sears Undergraduate Design Laboratory
Dept. of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science
Case Western Reserve University
10900 Euclid Ave, Glennan 314
Cleveland, Ohio  44106-7071
Phone (216) 368-2816 <216-368-2816> FAX (216) 368-6888 <216-368-6888>
E-mail: jcg66 at case.edu

On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 8:38 PM Rob Wiesler via TangerineSDR <
tangerinesdr at lists.tapr.org> wrote:

> (David is probably on the TangerineSDR list, but I don't know that for
> sure, so he may get an extra copy of this message (sorry).)
>
> On Tue, May 05, 2020 at 19:06:38 -0400, John Gibbons via TangerineSDR
> wrote:
> > This is intended as a starting point to generate input for further
> > refinement, so comments are welcome and encouraged.
>
> I like the base filename structure enough.  In particular, I like that
> it's sortable by date in any sane locale, and both the date and the node
> ID will align vertically (until 6 chars stops being enough for node IDs,
> or we start worrying about the Y10K problem).
>
> Does the date in the filename refer to:
> - the beginning of the record, or
> - the end of the record, or
> - a single day in its entirety, or
> - at most a single day, but no (significant) part of any other day?
>
> It's probably obvious to everyone that a "day" is a UTC day, but it's
> not in the specification, and it wouldn't hurt to add.
>
> I agree that the zero node ought to be set aside.
>
> We should use another letter or two for the "testing" and high/low-cost
> PSWS bits instead of allocating node IDs within specific ranges.  How
> about we (where X is 0-9 and * is any (possibly empty) sequence of A-Z):
> - use either NXXXXXL or LXXXXX for low-cost  PSWS nodes
> - use either NXXXXXH or HXXXXX for high-cost PSWS nodes
> - set aside  N00000*, L00000*, and/or H00000* as a test nodes with
>   invalid data and/or for other purposes
> - not explicitly denote valid data from testing systems in the filename
>
> A couple questions to answer on that subject:
> - What makes testing systems with valid data more/less important/notable
>   than other systems?
> - Can a testing system migrate to a production system without changing
>   its node ID?
> - Is it sufficient that testing systems will necessarily have low node
>   IDs in most cases?
>
> Let's at least specify WWVdata/ as existing relative to "the user"'s
> home directory, instead of /home/pi (it can't hurt to be explicit).
> Also, you have a typo, where you say that "~" is the "root filesystem
> for user", which is not a thing (you mean "home directory").
>
> Is there a reason you're avoiding a second '.' in the filename?  It's a
> little awkward to use 2p5 for 2.5, and that second period isn't going to
> confuse any software or upend the sorting.
>
> > We should probably create a mechanism for additions / refinements to this
> > document for further work rather than this email thread.
>
> We can always have both :)
>
> > I have the original .doc that created this - let me how we should handle
> > version control from here.  (Nathaniel?)
>
> Please turn this into a plain text file.  I can read PDFs, but it's not
> ideal, and I'm getting sick and tired of specification documents in
> other non-textual formats.  A plain text specification file has these
> properties:
>
> - Small file size (because this is 2020 and it totally matters)
> - Less wasted visual space when the document isn't all that long (again,
>   wishlist-grade)
> - Universally readable
> - Universally modifiable by the recipient (so recipients can offer
>   suggestions formatted as a pull request)
> - Diffs between revisions can be generated trivially, so that recipients
>   can:
>   - offer suggestions formatted as a patch
>   - figure out what changed without scanning the entire document for
>     thin red/yellow lines on a white background (very important to me)
> - Mergeable when put in version control (in addition to all the other
>   properties above you would want for version-controlled documents)
>
> --
> TangerineSDR mailing list
> TangerineSDR at lists.tapr.org
> http://lists.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/tangerinesdr_lists.tapr.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.tapr.org/pipermail/tangerinesdr_lists.tapr.org/attachments/20200505/a3e8bc64/attachment.html>