.
From: Beckerle, Mike
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2019 5:43:34 PM
To: dev@daffodil.apache.org
Subject: Re: Adding character encoding?
I think the number and variety of these things is fairly small.
They're all about exactly 1 legacy data format, mil-std-6016, so that's not an
argument
encounter them.
From: Sloane, Brandon
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2019 3:31:06 PM
To: dev@daffodil.apache.org
Subject: Re: Adding character encoding?
Does it make sense to add support for defining these in schema? The charsets I
am adding are pretty speicific
barrier to entry for us
inserting new encodings. However, if I were just a Daffodil user I would be at
a loss for dealing with this usecase.
From: Beckerle, Mike
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2019 12:57:41 PM
To: dev@daffodil.apache.org
Subject: Re: Adding character encoding
: Re: Adding character encoding?
The encodings are in daffodil-io, and for these small charsets it's very very
easy to support them.
There is already a 6 bit charset for DFI 264 DUI 001, and also some 5-bit
encodings. All this was motivated by Link16.
Take a look at file
From: Sloane, Brandon
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2019 11:43:40 AM
To: dev@daffodil.apache.org
Subject: Adding character encoding?
In working on schema for mil-std-6016, I have discovered a 6 bit character
encoding that is distinct from the X-DFDL-US-ASCII-6-BIT-PACKED encoding we
In working on schema for mil-std-6016, I have discovered a 6 bit character
encoding that is distinct from the X-DFDL-US-ASCII-6-BIT-PACKED encoding we
already support. What would the process for supporting this be?
Brandon T. Sloane
Associate, Services
bslo...@tresys.com | tresys.com
