From: John Morrison (jmorrison_at_ahc.net.au)
Date: 2002-01-23 12:40:01
John Morrison wrote:
> Before we decide the Stage 1 output format, I'd like to
> see the output protocols for more machines including
> different types of machines.
>
> I agree but whatever format we use it'll have to take account for all
> machines so maybe time stamps or at least a header containing the sampling
> rate should be added to the DataStream or set up directions.
John, do you think you could quote what other people say using
something that shows up in the plain-text version of your messages ?
As it is, it looks like you're talking to yourself, and the posting is
almost unreadable.
Sorry about that I've had to use WORD as my E-mail editor and it won't add
the >
How about this? Any better???? If not I'll see if I can fix the problem!!!
> That is the idea we create a Standard Format for the stream no matter what
> machine is providing the input.
> This way from Stage 2 up can be written no matter what EEG is plugged in,
> :-)
It doesn't have to be so complex. Why not just have standard input
and output functions that can read/write several different formats ?
Whenever a new format comes up, it only has to be coded once.
<<SNIP>>
OK I should clarify.
This is only for the internal communications from the Stage 1 "hardware
communications" module to the Stage 2 (processing) level.
The Stage 1 module will handle conversion from whatever format it comes in
as to the internal format.
That way we code the interface module once and that's it, the rest of the
software needs NO change!
Is this what you were referring to or have I missed the mark?
John Morrison
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 2002-07-27 12:28:37 BST