To be discussed: Do we need pretty name for feature group?

[danielmuellerma]

Feature Group has xml attribute "Pretty" - but pretty for feature groups is not defined in Appendix B. We should either define pretty names for feature groups in Appendix B or remove xml attribute "Pretty". Feature does not have xml attribute "Pretty".

[petrvanekrobe]

The whole "pretty" concept is not explained anywhere.

[AndriiVoitenko]

@petrvanekrobe the meaning is the same as Short name in Fixture Type. But you are right, we should change description of pretty name xml attribute, "The pretty name of the attribute ." - explains nothing.

[petrvanekrobe]

As discussed before the winter break, i added human aimed label to each attribute, it is in the Attributes with extended description branch, original PR: https://github.com/mvrdevelopment/spec/pull/122

This commit: https://github.com/mvrdevelopment/spec/pull/122/commits/0d2423f1cd1206ec1e1b1a88b5b4ee710190ce3b

I did as little editorializing as possible. @moritzstaffel i think this is ready to be used in the Builder to provide a bit better label for the user.

[moritzstaffel]

@petrvanekrobe I will have a look. Should I take care about getting this branch https://github.com/mvrdevelopment/spec/pull/122 into the main

[petrvanekrobe]

I can get that in. We could also merge in the Wireshark dissector and the MVR schema, what do you think?

[moritzstaffel]

I think this is a good thing!