Current iteration:
Desk Descriptor Header
1. Host computer type (2 bytes allowing up to 65536 models to be specified)
2. Hard/soft sector flag (1 byte)
3. Number of tracks (1 byte)
4. Disk drive RPM (2 bytes: 1 for whole number, 1 for fraction) [1]
Optional:
5. Archiver Name (24 bytes)
6. Archiver E-mail Address (48 bytes)
7. Disk Title (64 bytes)
8. Publisher (if applicable) (24 bytes)
9. Year of Publication (2 bytes)
A. Archive Description (256-512 bytes)
B. Archive Date (4 bytes: 2 bytes = year, 1 byte = month, 1 byte = day)
C. Archive Time (3 bytes: hour, minute, second)
***Does it make sense to have separate fields as specified #7-9 or should
we rely upon the archivist to include that data in the description? I
think so since this is important information that should be forced to be
included with the archive.
Maximum size: 685 bytes
[1] If applicable
Note: Encoding type moved to Track Descriptor Header
A Track Descriptor Header will precede each track and give an overall
description of the track:
Track Descriptor Header
1. Track number (2 bytes: 1 for whole number, 1 for fraction) [1]
2. Disk Side (1 byte)
3. Track format (logical or raw; host computer specific) (1 byte) [2]
4. Track size in bytes (2 bytes) [3]
5. Sector format (single-density, double-density, etc) (1 byte)
6. Encoding type (1 byte)
7. Sectors in this track (1 byte)
8. Interleave (1 byte)
9. Bytes per sector (2 bytes)
A. Bits per byte (1 byte)
B. Offset to next Track Descriptor Header (2 bytes)
Size: 15 bytes
[1] Fraction allows for specifying half- or quarter-track.
[2] If the track is in "raw" format then fields 3-9 are ignored.
[3] The total size in bytes of the raw track image.
I can start to see where the flexibility afforded by a markup language
makes sense. I just can't figure out why I am still resisting it though.
So, are we on the right track? The wrong track?
Sellam International Man of Intrigue and Danger
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Looking for a six in a pile of nines...
Coming soon: VCF 4.0!
VCF East: Planning in Progress
See
http://www.vintage.org for details!
Received on Thu Jun 01 2000 - 15:34:55 BST