Re: [FT] GZF - XML [x-list]

From: "Bell, Brian K" <Brian_Bell@dscc.dla.mil>

> I have been toying with the idea of trying to implement 
> an XML standard (for use within FTSR), but have not 
> delved into it too much.
> 
> As I am not an expert on XML, I would appreciate additional
participants.

I am. Also Java, and JDOM/SAX interfaces between the two.
Interested?
From - Wed Dec 13 16:38:40 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
	by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id GAA29068;
	Sat, 9 Dec 2000 06:05:21 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eB9C4Df63732;
	Sat, 9 Dec 2000 04:04:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sat, 9 Dec
2000 04:04:09 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eB9C47Y63696
	for gzg-l-outgoing; Sat, 9 Dec 2000 04:04:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:L/c/z5UWCr3zL55iQbgs9azJ0Bw7WZbJ@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eB9C44P63684
	for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Sat, 9 Dec 2000 04:04:04
-0800 (PST)
Received: from mail3.svr.pol.co.uk (mail3.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.193.19])
	by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
eB9C42f49397
	for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Sat, 9 Dec 2000 04:04:03 -0800
(PST)
	(envelope-from bif@bifsmith.fsnet.co.uk)
Received: from modem-133.great-tailed-grackle.dialup.pol.co.uk
([62.137.192.133] helo=auser)
	by mail3.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.13 #0)
	id 144ijQ-0007ZJ-00
	for gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu; Sat, 09 Dec 2000 12:04:01 +0000
Message-ID: <005d01c061d8$4f2db680$85c0893e@auser>
From: "bif smith" <bif@bifsmith.fsnet.co.uk>
To: "full thrust" <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>
Subject: Re[FT}Vectorized k-guns
Date: Sat, 9 Dec 2000 11:51:04 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:   
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de00000812

Tom Barclay was mentioning about vectors and k-guns, and if it was slow
(relitivly) round, the velocity of the ship would add/subtract damage to
the
k-gun round. My take is that the k-gun rounds are a fast (c fractional)
velocity weapon due to the facts that-
A-cannot be intercepted by pds (i.e. too fast)
B-requires no mass for ammo (meaning the rounds are very small)
C-If they were large weapons, you could see the "twitch" as the KV ship
expelled its rounds, and a small maneuver to alter your vector would
cause a
miss.
Also, consider how much a cl6 k-gun masses, and compair it to the mass
of
present day railguns, and the velocities now being accheaved. Due to the
range being the same for all k-guns, and it`s stated that the limiting
factor to hitting is the targeting solution from the computers, the
velcities from the barrel of the k-gun must be equal for all classes of
k-gun. If not, a cl.6 firing the same round as a cl.1 k-gun, would have
to
fire the round quicker for more damage. With the same targeting
solutions,
the rounds chance of hitting would be increased, and therefore it`s
range.
I hope you understan my reasoning (or is that rambling?).

BIF
"yorkshire born,yorkshire bred,
strong in arms, thick in head"
From - Wed Dec 13 16:38:40 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
	by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id GAA29035;
	Sat, 9 Dec 2000 06:05:08 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eB9C4E863741;
	Sat, 9 Dec 2000 04:04:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sat, 9 Dec
2000 04:04:09 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eB9C47X63697
	for gzg-l-outgoing; Sat, 9 Dec 2000 04:04:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:EkK8wPNh+z9fYq3jY3pIZWrXIhsP2aHC@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
	by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eB9C44P63691
	for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Sat, 9 Dec 2000 04:04:04
-0800 (PST)
Received: from mail3.svr.pol.co.uk (mail3.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.193.19])
	by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
eB9C44f49406
	for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Sat, 9 Dec 2000 04:04:04 -0800
(PST)
	(envelope-from bif@bifsmith.fsnet.co.uk)
Received: from modem-133.great-tailed-grackle.dialup.pol.co.uk
([62.137.192.133] helo=auser)
	by mail3.svr.pol.co.uk with smtp (Exim 3.13 #0)
	id 144ijS-0007ZJ-00
	for gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu; Sat, 09 Dec 2000 12:04:02 +0000
Message-ID: <005e01c061d8$50637760$85c0893e@auser>
From: "bif smith" <bif@bifsmith.fsnet.co.uk>
To: "full thrust" <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>
Subject: Re[ds2]handling interface vehicle design
Date: Sat, 9 Dec 2000 12:04:31 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:   
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de00000811

This subject brings up the scale difference between FT and DS. In the MT
suppliment, the example given for interface landers on the troopship
gave
them a mass of 4 each (400 tonnes). I did work out, from the MT stats in
the
book, that 1 size level in DS is equal to 8 tonnes.

Anybody care to work out DS stats for a size level 50 vehicle? I think
the
large interface landers sould be constructed using FT rules, and small
landers (size 7 or less) using DS rules. After all, a FT mass 3 landing
bay
(2 mass for vehicles), could carry *roughly* 4 size 7 DS landers.

BIF
"yorkshire born,yorkshire bred,
strong in arms, thick in head"