Difference between revisions of "Talk:Fileobject"
From Forensics Wiki
(→sugestion: Use carvpath anotations) |
|||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
1) A 53248 byte fragment at offset 4096 | 1) A 53248 byte fragment at offset 4096 | ||
| + | |||
2) A 28672 byte fragment at offset 258048 | 2) A 28672 byte fragment at offset 258048 | ||
| + | |||
3) 1047552 bytes of sparse data. | 3) 1047552 bytes of sparse data. | ||
I don't suggest adding long token notations. Just the '+', '_' and 'S' stuff. | I don't suggest adding long token notations. Just the '+', '_' and 'S' stuff. | ||
Revision as of 05:18, 23 August 2011
sugestion: Use carvpath anotations
I see the use of colons in byte_runs content. Earlier versions of libcarvpath used such a notation, but cross platform concerns resulted in this being changed into the plus sign. I would suggest that the CarvPath annotation format may be a suitable alternative for annotating byte_runs content. This is a straight forward and simple format, for example:
4096+53248_258048+28672_S1047552
Would be the way to annotate a byte_runs consisting of:
1) A 53248 byte fragment at offset 4096
2) A 28672 byte fragment at offset 258048
3) 1047552 bytes of sparse data.
I don't suggest adding long token notations. Just the '+', '_' and 'S' stuff.
