[LSC] Call for Votes: File Format Restrictions for Official Parts

[Travis Cobbs]

Files in the official library do use Windows line termination.  I see that
this isn't covered anywhere in the document, and isn't in the LDraw 1.0 spec
either.  I'd be happy to add it and re-submit for votes.  It doesn't matter
that not everyone using the library uses Windows, the files themselves use
<CR><LF>.  Renderers in other operating systems need to deal with this (and
all the current ones do, to the best of my knowledge).

I'm not exactly sure what isn't clear about the term "last line".  All lines
in the file must be valid lines, so I don't see how your suggested change
improves things.  However, how about this (as a replacement for the Last
Line section):

Line Termination
All lines in the file must be use the standard DOS/Windows line termination
of <CR><LF> (carriage return/line feed).  The last two bytes of the file
must be <CR><LF>.  (In other words, there must be a <CR><LF> line terminator
at the end of the last line in the file.)

--Travis

On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 10:55 AM, Michael Heidemann <mikeheide at web.de>
wrote:


>  I am sorry, but I do not agree to the last section.

>

> *Last Line*

>

>  The last line in the file must include the terminating <CR><LF> (carriage

> return/line feed).

>

>

> It is not clear what what is the last line. And could the other line ends

> with a CR or LF alone? Not everybody is using Windows systems.

>

> Better would be:

> A valid line (linetype 0 - 5) has to be terminated by <CR> or <LF> or <CR><

> LF>.

>

> cu

> mikeheide

>

>

> Travis Cobbs schrieb:

>

> This is a call for votes to ratify the following document:

>

> http://www.ldraw.org/Article408.html

>

> Please note: it is known that this document is incomplete.  I feel that it

> would be better to have the incomplete document ratified now, and then add

> things to it in the future, than to continue indefinitely with no official

> document.  All future changes will have to be ratified, but that doesn't

> prevent us from leaving the ratified version of the document in the scratch

> pad for future edits, so that multiple changes can be ratified at once.

>

> It is important to note that the items that are missing should all be more

> restrictions, not exceptions to the given rules.  If anyone knows of any

> exceptions to the rules in the document, please speak up.

>

> --Travis

>

> ------------------------------

>

> _______________________________________________

> LSC mailing listLSC at ldraw.orghttp://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/lsc

>

>

> _______________________________________________

> LSC mailing list

> LSC at ldraw.org

> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/lsc

>

>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://five.pairlist.net/pipermail/lsc/attachments/20080520/103bd3c1/attachment.html>