@bemoody and I briefly chatting about how version control of the WFDB spec has happened in the past. My understanding based on the conversation is that the WFDB specification and WFDB C Software were tightly coupled, essentially sharing a version. You can see examples of this in the header spec, e.g.
"WFDB library versions 5.1 and earlier ignore the base counter value field"
"WFDB library versions 5.1 and earlier ignore the counter frequency field."
"Header files for multi-segment records (supported by WFDB library version 9.1 and later versions) contain a segment specification line for each segment"
"WFDB library versions 5.0 and earlier ignore baseline fields"
... etc
@bemoody explained that the C software will look for a WFDB software version in the (first row of the?) header file and will exit if it finds incompatibility.
We agreed that it would be helpful to decouple versioning of the WFDB spec from the WFDB software and that it would be appropriate to tag the current version as 1.0.0. We can then work on additional features and bump the version as needed.
We should make sure that the current spec is fully documented in this repository before tagging the version and closing this issue.
@bemoody and I briefly chatting about how version control of the WFDB spec has happened in the past. My understanding based on the conversation is that the WFDB specification and WFDB C Software were tightly coupled, essentially sharing a version. You can see examples of this in the header spec, e.g.
@bemoody explained that the C software will look for a WFDB software version in the (first row of the?) header file and will exit if it finds incompatibility.
We agreed that it would be helpful to decouple versioning of the WFDB spec from the WFDB software and that it would be appropriate to tag the current version as 1.0.0. We can then work on additional features and bump the version as needed.
We should make sure that the current spec is fully documented in this repository before tagging the version and closing this issue.