Subject: Re: struct dive_table dive_table and a wider view

[Alex Deas]

Dear Henrik,

We understand that.

There are two issues in migrating rebreather data logs analysis to Subsurface:

1.  UDDF needs to support the elements in rebreather data, and do so reasonably
efficiently because there is a lot of it,

2.  Subsurface needs to be able to handle large data sets. so the user can
select what data he is interested in, zoom into it, pan, browse etc.

This is why the document considers  both UDDF and the data structure issues.

With kind regards,

Alex

On 18 April 2013 at 11:36 Henrik Brautaset Aronsen <subsurface at henrik.synth.no>
wrote:
> Alex Deas wrote:
> > On the structure, would there be any interest from the UDDF/SubSurface
> > community in upgrading the dive log structures in a bigger way?
>
> Hi Alex!
>
> Thanks for your interest in Subsurface. I just thought I'd clear up a
> little thing: Subsurface utilize its own compact and human readable XML
> dive log format.
>
> UDDF is not used internally, mostly because it's an overly engineered,
> unnecessarily complex and quite unreadable format. We merely provide
> convenient UDDF import and export options via XSLT transforms. These
> options might not be complete, but we are more than willing to improve
> them to support (a future version of) UDDF better, if necessary.
>
> I guess others have something to say about this and the rest of your
> email as well :)
>
> Cheers,
> Henrik
--
Alex Deas PhD, FIEE, C.Eng
Lead Technologist
Deep Life Ltd (IBC)
Skype: DeeplifeLtd

If you've received this email by mistake, we're sorry for bothering you. It may
contain information that's confidential, so please delete it without sharing it.
If you let us know, we can try to stop it from happening again. Thank you.

[P] Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.hohndel.org/pipermail/subsurface/attachments/20130418/99f10fcc/attachment.html>