Regarding a log format, why not just ise ADIF?
WB0OEW
Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2018 09:39:38 +0100
> From: Werner Koch <w...@gnupg.org>
> To: Andy Stewart <kb1...@mval.net>
> Cc: xlog-discussion@nongnu.org
> Subject: Re: [Xlog-discussion] A few xlog patches
> Message-ID: <8736s1h0vp....@wheatstone.g10code.de>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> On Sun, 11 Nov 2018 23:11, kb1...@mval.net said:
>
> > I am interested in a tarball and a screenshot of the main window.
>
> There are not many visible changes yet, give me some time to add
> something useful. I implemented a global contest flag which is
> currently not in the preferences which allows to swicth between two
> different sort order and will also be used to speed up entering a new
> QSO.
>
> Something different: I don't quite understand the design of the flog
> format for logs. Is it really needed to have fixed length fields? I
> can imagine a more compact format which could easily be detected and
> used as an flog2 format, for example:
>
> NR:CALL:TIME:TXRST:RXRST:NAME:REMARK
> 1:DD9JN:20181115T173701:59 348:59 001:Werner:
> 2:KB1OIQ:20181115T173751:59 349:59 002:Any:xlog maintainer%0Asecond line:
>
> fields are delimited by colons and percent escaping is used to quote the
> colon and other characters (like the LF in the remark). The percent
> escaping would be very rarely used because % is not used in standard
> QSOs. This also means you can easily process such files like:
>
> awk -F: {print $2} | sort | uniq
>
> to get a sorted list of call signs. The names of the fields could also
> be dropped and a standard order be defined. Having empty fields would
> be just a colon. And well, the time format could also be changed to an
> easy sortable one, like above.
>
>
>
> Shalom-Salam,
>
> Werner
>
>
_______________________________________________
Xlog-discussion mailing list
Xlog-discussion@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/xlog-discussion
