Hi Ben, bsupnik schrieb: > Ralf Gerlich wrote: >>There was criticism of the physical storage model of apt.dat, as it has >>been and probably will continue to be in version 850. I just wanted to >>say that, if the FlightGear project were to "invent" its own format - >>let's call it FGAPT for simplicity - and would then not be able to >>convert from APT to FGAPT _and_ backwards, we would lose the possibility >>of properly interchanging data with X-Plane and Robin Peel's database. >>We might not lose the possibility in total, but at least in part. > > > Ah...well, it's that translatability that's most important I think ... > there's really no reason why FG should be stuck with an X-Plane > container model.
Exactly. [SNIP] > Well, there is the problem: if you want to database the highest level > layout info, you need to standardize the high level model. Then that's where we need to work with you and Robin Peel regarding the next generation database ;-) Cheers, Ralf _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
