UDDF Export Format
Long, Martin
martin at longhome.co.uk
Tue Dec 9 05:29:54 PST 2014
Hi,
I'm currently working on some patches to the UDDF export format, to
address a few issues which I'm seeing in the files.
For example, I've separated buddies out, and linked to multiply
buddies, rather than the current method which is to always link to a
single buddy, which may actually be several in a comma separated list.
However, I'm noticing some big differences from the UDDF
specification. I'm not sure if this is essentially a bug in the UDDF
export, or if I'm missing something fundamental. It seems that the
implementer would have made a concious effort to implement it in this
way, and I can't find a reason why.
I'm referring to the UDDF spec here: http://www.uddf.org/
Here are a few examples of differences I've found:
In Subsurface UDDF, mutliple <dive_site> elements under <uddf> in the
following form:
<dive_site id="Corsair Reef">
<name>Corsair Reef</name>
<geography>
<location>Corsair Reef</location>
<gps>
<latitude>-4.610968</latitude>
<longitude>55.407003</longitude>
</gps>
</geography>
</dive_site>
<dive_site id="Aquarium">
<name>Aquarium</name>
<geography>
<location>Aquarium</location>
<gps>
<latitude>-4.598471</latitude>
<longitude>55.415920</longitude>
</gps>
</geography>
</dive_site>
In the UDDF spec, a single <divesite> (no '_'), containing 1..n
<divebase> and 1..n <site>
<divesite>
<divebase id="db-1">
<!-- here description of the first dive base -->
</divebase>
<divebase id="db-2">
<!-- here description of the second dive base -->
</divebase>
<divebase id="db-3">
<!-- here description of the third dive base -->
</divebase>
<!-- here more <divebase> elements if necessary -->
<site id="site-1">
<!-- here description of the first dive site -->
</site>
<site id="site-2">
<!-- here description of the second dive site -->
</site>
.... etc (http://www.streit.cc/extern/uddf_v320/en/divesite.html)
Also, linking of sites/buddies to profiles is done in Subsurface UDDF as:
<buddy_ref ref="Jxxxx xxxx, Sxxxxx xxxxxx"/>
<dive_site_ref ref="Stoney Cove"/>
In the UDDF spec, it should be:
<link ref="Jxxxx xxxx, Sxxxxx xxxxxx"/>
<link ref="Stoney Cove"/>
(http://www.streit.cc/extern/uddf_v320/en/sections_profiledata.html)
Some input would be gratefully received. I'd also like to know if
there are going to be barriers to having such a patch accepted.
Thanks
MartinHi,
I'm currently working on some patches to the UDDF export format, to
address a few issues which I'm seeing in the files.
For example, I've separated buddies out, and linked to multiply
buddies, rather than the current method which is to always link to a
single buddy, which may actually be several in a comma separated list.
However, I'm noticing some big differences from the UDDF
specification. I'm not sure if this is essentially a bug in the UDDF
export, or if I'm missing something fundamental. It seems that the
implementer would have made a concious effort to implement it in this
way, and I can't find a reason why.
I'm referring to the UDDF spec here: http://www.uddf.org/
Here are a few examples of differences I've found:
In Subsurface UDDF, mutliple <dive_site> elements under <uddf> in the
following form:
<dive_site id="Corsair Reef">
<name>Corsair Reef</name>
<geography>
<location>Corsair Reef</location>
<gps>
<latitude>-4.610968</latitude>
<longitude>55.407003</longitude>
</gps>
</geography>
</dive_site>
<dive_site id="Aquarium">
<name>Aquarium</name>
<geography>
<location>Aquarium</location>
<gps>
<latitude>-4.598471</latitude>
<longitude>55.415920</longitude>
</gps>
</geography>
</dive_site>
In the UDDF spec, a single <divesite> (no '_'), containing 1..n
<divebase> and 1..n <site>
<divesite>
<divebase id="db-1">
<!-- here description of the first dive base -->
</divebase>
<divebase id="db-2">
<!-- here description of the second dive base -->
</divebase>
<divebase id="db-3">
<!-- here description of the third dive base -->
</divebase>
<!-- here more <divebase> elements if necessary -->
<site id="site-1">
<!-- here description of the first dive site -->
</site>
<site id="site-2">
<!-- here description of the second dive site -->
</site>
.... etc (http://www.streit.cc/extern/uddf_v320/en/divesite.html)
Also, linking of sites/buddies to profiles is done in Subsurface UDDF as:
<buddy_ref ref="Jxxxx xxxx, Sxxxxx xxxxxx"/>
<dive_site_ref ref="Stoney Cove"/>
In the UDDF spec, it should be:
<link ref="Jxxxx xxxx, Sxxxxx xxxxxx"/>
<link ref="Stoney Cove"/>
(http://www.streit.cc/extern/uddf_v320/en/sections_profiledata.html)
Some input would be gratefully received. I'd also like to know if
there are going to be barriers to having such a patch accepted.
Thanks
Martin
More information about the subsurface
mailing list