MacDive Forums

Hy all,

My Dive Computer is an Aladin Air Z and I use Paladin and AquaDiveLog on an old Palm to keep the diving profiles on my holidays.
The Aladin can only keep 200min of profiles and therefore it needs some assistance....

I have all my dives stored on the Palm in AquaDiveLog but want to switch to a Dive Log (iPhone)/MacDive (iMac) Solution.
There is a Palm Conduit to convert the ADL Database to UDDF for Import in Smarttrack from Uwatec, but this does not realy help as there is no export supported.
If the serial port gets available on the iPhone downloading of computer data will be easy....


Now I'am looking for any kind of Documentation of the UDCF Format that MacDive will import,
as I want to build a converter from the strange UDDF V1 file generated from the conduit.
-> the JTrack Converter...

Is there a DTD or even better a XSD available for the UDCF Import in MacDive ?

I am doing some scripting to convert another wierd format to UDCF to import in macdive.
You can find the syntax here : http://www.streit.cc/extern/udcf/

And just export any macdive dive to get an idea on what it likes. It does not seem to work flawless yet with all tags, but that is hopefully fixed in the fuure with a small update.

@glennv: thank's for the info, looks like macdive is getting very popular....

I started creating an xsd for the udcf spec described at: http://www.streit.cc/dive/page17/page15.html

when I have finished I will check if the udcf format is usefull for my ADL data...

After studying the UDCF Format a little longer I realized that this format is only helpful for dive-computer data, any additional information usually recorded in a logbook is not specified and can therefore not be processed.

This means that there is no real need to try to build a converter from ADL to UDCF, because there is to much information that can not be converted.

I have to wait that UDDF is implemented in Mac-Dive and then try to get my data to match the implemented Version....

I will start trying to convert UDDF 1.0 from ADL to UDDF 2.2....

What are you then going to do with the UDDF 2.2 ?
Do you have a divelog manager program that supports that as import ?

glennv wrote:What are you then going to do with the UDDF 2.2 ?

If UDDF is implemented in Mac-Dive I think they will go for UDDF 2.1 or 2.2 (there is a xsd available for UDDF 2.1)

glennv wrote:Do you have a divelog manager program that supports that as import ?

DivingLog 5.0 on Windows supports UDDF 2.x, it also synchronize with the iPhone DivLog but I would like to stay on mac...

Ah, I hear you. Same here . Want to stay away from windows crap

I haven't looked at UDDF. UDCF put me off that format entirely. I haven't had many requests at all for it until now, but I can look at adding some support for it. Won't be in the next patch though, I'd rather get that out sooner than hold it up.

nick wrote:I haven't looked at UDDF. UDCF put me off that format entirely. I haven't had many requests at all for it until now, but I can look at adding some support for it.

Hope to see this in release 2.1....

nick wrote:Won't be in the next patch though, I'd rather get that out sooner than hold it up.

It's also my opinion that patches should go out often, thats why there are 2.0.x Versions


@nick off-topic: as requested on some other posts I also would like to have a overall dive number

daniel_m wrote: It's also my opinion that patches should go out often, thats why there are 2.0.x Versions

Yes, that's why 2.0 is missing some features. Release early, release often..

Edit: to expand, I basically treat macdive as a work in progress. 2.0.0 was never intended to be a "final" version, it's just a revamped foundation to work from. Any of you who followed through from the early days should be aware of that, given how much it progressed from 1.0.0 to 1.5.3. I looked back at 1.0 the other day and had to laugh.

@nick off-topic: as requested on some other posts I also would like to have a overall dive number

There are threads about this around - no-one has yet convinced me of a useful purpose for it. But it is by far the most commonly requested feature.