After 4.3 is out... CCR

[Willem Ferguson]

On 18/12/2014 11:21, Anton Lundin wrote:
> On 18 December, 2014 - Willem Ferguson wrote:
>
>> On 18/12/2014 09:33, Anton Lundin wrote:
>>
> Obviously i've missed it. Could you give me a message id?

I forwarded the message to you. Shout if you do not receive it.

>
>> So, the options are:
>> In the APD import, request whether the user wishes results for C1 or C2.
>> In any case, for each sensor, summarise the mean and maximum differences in
>> O2 readings between C1 and C2, making use of the Extra Data tab.
>>
> I think it will become way to messy trying to adapt subsurface to this
> special case. Either we treat them as one or two different.
>
> Trying to invent some magical values to save would probably just be way
> to messy. I don't really know if anyone actually uses Subsurface with
> APD-vision-electronics.
>
> I whacked together the APD importer because i thought it would be fun
> actually having some CCR profiles to play with, but before we plumb down
> into actually working on this i would like to hear from someone using
> it..
Our APD divers do not use Subsurface simply because it does not yet 
offer them what they need for CCR dive interpretation. It is a 
chicken-and-egg problem. All of these divers I know use APD LogViewer in 
Windows. When they dive other equipment (e.g. Prism or Poseidon) they 
use other dedicated software. No unification of information. This is 
what makes Subsurface different. But we first need to see that we offer 
the basic functionality that is required. Around here, many of them 
(diving Poseidon, APD) are looking at Subsurface with interest to see 
what may become possible. I have a whole crowd of divers ready to test 
Subsurface on Poseidon (MkVI and Se7en) and on APD and I am actually 
under pressure from the Poseidon divers. So the window of opportunity is 
there.... But we need to complete the UI first,

>> Another APD issue. Since the data are obtained in CSV format, one would not
>> like Subsurface to confuse APD data with other CSV data sources. So it may
>> make sense to recommend that the CSV data for APD, after it has been pasted
>> into a text file, is saved with an extension of .apd   This will facilitate
>> it for importing the information into Subsurface. But, fundamentally, the
>> CSV mechanism would still be used. Do you have any opinion on this?
>>
> Its a table from the APDLogViewer that gets saved. I don't remember what
> that dialog looked like but if it says CSV, we shouldn't rename it.
In Windows, one needs to copy and paste the complete table to the 
clipboard (using a special button in the APD LogViewer) and then paste 
it into a text file.
The special button just says: "copy to clipboard". Therefore the file 
has no default extension, but the data are explicitly in CSV format.

The question is if one wishes Subsurface to be able to distinguish the 
APD log files from other CSV files. For instance, even though the 
Poseidon dive logs are also CSV formatted (but do not have a CSV 
extension), we have dedicated code for importing these.

In principle CCR logs behave NOT like a dive computer, but rather like 
any other digital dive data source such as JDivelog, Divinglog5, DM4 or 
whatever. We have dedicated code for importing from each of these 
different sources. A certain amount of customisation for each CCR device 
is probably inevitable. The question is: how much customisation? I would 
agree with you: As little customisation as one can possibly get away 
with. But this is still not a precise enough answer that really helps. 
Fortunately it appears that there is currently a lot of standardisation 
on the Shearwater for CCR, so that is likely to be immensely useful to 
Subsurface. After APD, Shearwater should probably be the next target.
Kind regards,
willem