[sebhc] H8D files and labels

Eric J. Rothfus eric at rothfus.com
Tue Mar 28 22:53:27 CST 2006

> Ok --- I GET IT --- Nobody likes the idea.

:-)  Sorry it wasn't my intent to pile on to any negative type
responses.  Floppy formats is one of the soap-boxes I get up
upon every now and then.

> You can't stop people from doing their own thing - especially if the
> alternatives are completely at odds with your way of thinking (like
> storing binary sector data in octal-ASCII). So I don't have a problem
> with this.

Heck no, this is just a hobby...definitely do what you want!  That's
what makes this whole thing fun.  My intent was just to chime in with
an opinion, and if I can sway people one way or the other, then
mission accomplished.  If not, oh well, I'll continue to do my thing.

> What I do have a problem with is people developing their own
> formats and NOT documenting them. Anyone who's ever had a
> TeleDisk image that refused to turn itself back into a physical
> diskette knows what I am talking about... If I have decent
> documentation on how the image is formatted, I can explore
> whatever means I find necessary to recreate a disk ...


> Take ImageDisk for example - it is designed to replace TeleDisk (with
> a documented format), and attempts to replicate EXACTLY the soft-
> sector disk that was originally recorded - to this end, It records the
> exact sector numbering and ordering, normal/deleted address marks,
> maps for cylinder and head numbering to accomodate non-standard
> formats, and quite a bit more - in short, I record everything I can
> determine about the disk from the PC's FDC in the image file. I also
> have a clear file identified with the IMD version and creation timestamp,
> and an unlimited size comment field.
> This is probably pretty close to what you describe...

Now you're talking!  Could I get the doc for the Imagedisk format
please?  I'd like to teach the SVD tools to use the format.  Off-list
would make sense.

> ...thats my whole point... You have to pick a boundary between
> preserving "nothiing" and preserving "everything" - the exact
> position of that boundary will vary depending on your intended
> use for the image format.

Well put...you have to pick that boundary.  And that's where most
of the discussion centers around.  Different hardware causes that
boundary to move.  Trying to support images with copy protection
for machines like the TRS-80 and Apple ][ demands a different
level of image replication than does a simple H8/9 or N* disk.

Anyway, I really don't want to belabor the point any longer.
You and I agree on the most important point:  an image format
s*cks if it isn't documented, period.

I'll remain in search of a "common image format" or a least a
family of image formats (hopefully small number) that will stand
the test of time, preserving these old disks and their
ideosyncrasies upon which the hardware depended.

> Having the ability to marry the description to the disk image would
> have been convienent - but enough already - it's clear that this is
> not what the group wants, so I will withdraw the suggestion.

It's still not too late to implement the H17 format.  :-)

Delivered by the SEBHC Mailing List

More information about the Sebhc mailing list