UDDF Export

[Long, Martin]

> In general I have a dim view of the UDDF format (it's over designed and
> horribly verbose), but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't do it right on
> export.

Yes, and yes. Although it is a little more normalised than the
subsurface format, which feels a bit nicer for handling buddies,
sites, trips etc. What's good is that we do seem to be able to express
just about everything without any data loss.

>>  - Lots of areas where there are mandatory tags we need to provide
>> (looks like most of this is static).
>
>
> Hmm. Mandatory static tags. What's the entropy of that?

I haven't looked in detail yet, but there are just a few bits missing,
like some strings in the <generator>. We have the <name> tag in
<manufacturer>, for example, but no name in the root <generator>. The
other I noticed was that we were missing some mandatory personal data,
which we can't provide, but we should probably at least put the tags
in for compliance.

> After talking to Willem and Pablo I might delay the release until after the
> weekend to get some last changes to the manual.
>
> This also gives an extra bit of time for testing and bug fixing.

Ok great. I'll get the patches out asap anyway.