27 Sep
2012
27 Sep
'12
11:52 a.m.
On 27/09/2012 01:24, Dan Smith wrote: [...cut...]
I'd appreciate some feedback and discussion on this. We don't have to solve the whole problem right now, but I'd like to make sure that what we settle on is something we can deal with in the long-term, even if we do extend it in the future.
I must say I'm not an xml expert but the suggested format seams more than good.
I dunno what to call it, really. I burned .chirp on the generic XML format (which I've never liked), so I'm calling this CDF (chirp data format) for the moment.
...mmm... what about .chirp2?
73 de IZ3GME Marco