Clarify the format of core:version #298
Conversation
|
The python implementation also omits the "v" in its |
|
Not to imply that the python-sigmf version is synonymous with the version of the standard ... just a data point. |
|
The most recent tag in this SigMF repo is This issue is also related to #297, where I'd like to fix the tags and push a |
Maybe, but that seems like a separate issue that could have its own pull request. I used 1.0.0 because that's what is written everywhere in the document currently. |
argilo
force-pushed
the
clarify-version
branch
from
100850a
to
8dbbd84
Compare
|
I updated this to explicitly state that the format is /cc @jacobagilbert |
|
Thanks @argilo - I'd like to remove the "currently this is..." part though. Mostly because I don't want to need to update this every release. Reasonable? I'll get this merged. |
Also, update the examples to use the correct format.
argilo
force-pushed
the
clarify-version
branch
from
8dbbd84
to
89ddea6
Compare
|
Sounds fine. Removed. |
According to sigmf/SigMF#298 the SigMF version should not have a leading 'v'. Signed-off-by: Daniel Estévez <daniel@destevez.net>
According to sigmf/SigMF#298 the SigMF version should not have a leading 'v'. Signed-off-by: Daniel Estévez <daniel@destevez.net>
Some of the examples in the specification use
1.0.0, while others usev1.0.0. The definition ofcore:versiondoes not specify the exact format.GNU Radio's SigMF Sink uses
1.0.0, and it's the only version accepted by IQEngine's validator, so I would assume that was intended to be the correct value.I've updated the examples and added a clarification to the definition of
core:version.