>> -----Original Message----- >> From: cctalk-bounces(a)classiccmp.org >> [mailto:cctalk-bounces@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Cini, Richard >> Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2004 10:02 AM >> To: 'General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts' >> Subject: RE: Let's develop an open-source media archive standard >> >> I haven't read the entire thread on this but I did read >> Steve Thatcher's idea and it describes about where I was >> coming out on this myself. >> >> I might have missed what the ultimate use of this archive >> would be. Will the archive be used to (1) re-generate >> original media; (2) operate with emualtors; (3) both? >> >> To ensure integrity of the data I would propose recording >> the data in the Intel Hex format -- it's text-based and has >> built-in CRC. Now, we'd have to modify the standard format >> a bit to accommodate a larger address space and to add some >> sort of standardized header (a "Hardware Descriptor"). This >> data would be used by the de-archiver to interpret the >> stream of data read from the data area (the "Hex Block"). >> >> I agree that a multi-layer approach offers the best >> combination of platform neutrality and portability. I don't >> really know if we need two or three layers as Steve >> described to describe the file in a standard fashion. Using >> an Intel Hex-like format would increase the "de-archiving" >> time, but in my view it's a fair trade-off. De-archiving >> software could translate the platform-neutral file into >> another format better suited for use in emulators. >> >> I think that we should start compiling a list of the >> various media we want represented and how that media is >> organized natively. I don't mean "well, it has blocks and >> sectors" either. We should examine the exact format down to >> the actual numbers (i.e., "2048 blocks of 256-bytes >> recorded twice"). Seeing how the various data stores are >> organized should bring some clarity to how we should represent it. >> >> Just my $0.02. >> >> Rich >>