From: kegs@provalid.com   
      
   In article , Oliver Schmidt  wrote:   
   >Hi Kent,   
   >   
   >It seems to me that your topic is by now rather far away from where we   
   >(or at least I) started.   
   >   
   >But let me first try to avoid potential misunderstandings:   
   >   
   >1. Is it great that .DSK images are often DOS3.3 and often ProODS   
   >ordered? No.   
   >   
   >Personal note: If I could decide from scratch, I'd have .DSK images   
   >simply being always in the pyhsical sector order. My first   
   >pre-internet emulator worked that way.   
   >   
   >2. Is it great that the most popular Apple II disk image type has to   
   >go without any meta data at all. No.   
   >   
   >Personal note: If I could decide from scratch, I'd have all disk   
   >images come with extensible meta data.   
   >   
   >Okay, now to what used to be the topic at hand:   
   >   
   >1. Is the issues with .DSK images noticably reduced by Michael   
   >renaming his .DSK file to .PO? No.   
      
   Actually, my thesis is most of these .DSK images in ProDOS sector order are   
   relatively recent creations (within the last 20 years), and are not historical.   
   And so asking people who are creating these images now to use .PO for ProDOS   
   order would achieve my goal.   
      
   >2. Is Michael's .DSK file hard to auto-detect? No.   
   >   
   >Just my two cents,   
   >Oliver   
      
   What is your suggested algorithm for auto-detecting the sector order of   
   .dsk images?   
      
   Kent   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)