On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 5:13 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) <nemowiki@gmail.com> wrote:

Diederik van Liere, 07/09/2013 16:51:

You think people won't mess up XML?

I don't dare suggesting what format could be better, I just had past experiences make my internal bells ring at the word "CSV" and wondered if the correct format is documented. Thanks for the clarification.

It would depend on who the audience is.  If it is for people with little research experience and with little experience in computer programming, then yes, csv is a must.  It is compatible with open office and Microsoft Excel.  It allows for a certain type of user to interact with it.  I do not believe xml renders as nicely in either program as csv.  Using a more complex file format makes it difficult for that audience to use it.  I would assume that other users would be less likely to need a tool that gets this data because they could build their own an customize the output to their specific needs.  Thus, their concerns seem like they should be secondary. 

My problem now is the output names are complete garbage, and I cannot tell what the heck the file is from the random string generated.

-- 

twitter: purplepopple
blog: ozziesport.com

_______________________________________________
Analytics mailing list
Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics