On Tue, 11 Jan 2005, Asterisk wrote: > In my mind, (yes, a small one compared to the giants walking around > here) There are several advantages in this method: > > a) Parsing one line of data per record is in order of magnitude easier > to code.
Not really, unless you have to invent string handling first. It is very easy in C++/perl/java etc. It is not even hard in C with no libraries at all. > b) As mentioned, further fields can be added at any time without > breaking code The current format is tagged. How much easier can it get to add more fields? At the moment the order is not fixed either which is nice from a flexibility point. You can have optional fields that ar only output if they make sense. > c) output can be exported directly into spreadsheets True, but a trivial amount of script magic can transform the current tagged format into whatever you want. For more major post processing converting it to xml first may be useful/flexible. > I know that perhaps I've talked a load of BS - I would appreciate it if > people could comment on this before I head up a blind alley. I feel that > it would be more useful and easier for us as developers if there were a > common event manager layout, rather than a fixed number of lines per > action type / event type, and one that follows a more common data / > record layout. It is not fixed, I think thats is why you are thinking along these lines. It is a tagged format. Given the nature of the data that is sent (what fields are valid may vary) a tagged format is probably the only sane way of representing the data. Peter _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
