Re: What's next after the common log format?

>> The current format is positional, so there's no clean way to add new items 
>> to the format without breaking existing tools.
>
>Many, if not most, of the current analyzers quietly ignore extra
>entries after the last field in the Common Log Format, so it's
>possible to add new fields there.

I was really getting at cases where you had two (or more) server modules 
want to log information (say SSL and S-HTTP).  If you just tack new stuff 
on the end of the line, then tools that know about one type of log 
extension information will break when they encounter a request with 
information from the other type.

You could tag the extra entries with enough info for tools to distinguish. 
The generalization of this idea is some sort of name-value format.

-andy