- From: Andy Robinson <andy@reportlab.com>
- Date: Thu, 11 May 2017 16:34:46 +0100
- To: Nicolas Launois <nicolas.launois@european-athletics.org>
- Cc: Martin Alvarez-Espinar <martin.alvarez@fundacionctic.org>, "public-opentrack@w3.org" <public-opentrack@w3.org>
On 11 May 2017 at 08:26, Nicolas Launois <nicolas.launois@european-athletics.org> wrote: > For instance, they keep the sport specific code there: > http://odf.olympictech.org/2016-Rio/codes/HTML/odf_codes_OG/odf_codes.htm Good to see they use the same codes the sport already uses! It's also good to note in our docs where we agree with ODF > > In this document > (http://odf.olympictech.org/2016-Rio/general/PDF/ODF2_Foundation_Principles.pdf), > there is simple and general definition of the structure of competitions: > http://odf.olympictech.org/2016-Rio/general/PDF/ODF2_Foundation_Principles.pdf > > Unlike what it was with the first version of the ODF (all messages sent > after each round and competition, athletes and events defined by codes in > the messages, that was highlighted by Cristiano from deltatre in Madrid), > the ODF-2 messages can be sent by event and round, specifically for start > list or result, and they include the athlete’s name, the name of the event, > phase and the details of the result. I will have more details today. That sounds MUCH better. I look forward to hearing more. You may want to suggest to the IOC that they should publish examples, as well as standards. It would be great to have a sample of real ODF messages from Rio available, and it would be good for them as others could then learn to comply and interoperate with them - e.g. we could build two-way gateways. Some messages may be private in nature, but the finish data from a day of athletics should not. - Andy
Received on Thursday, 11 May 2017 15:35:20 UTC