Re: Standard defined field names in Wireshark dissectors

[Graham Bloice <graham.bloice () trihedral com>]

On Sun, 5 Jan 2020 at 15:42, Tomasz Moń <desowin () gmail com> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I have noticed that some USB dissectors do follow the field names as
> defined in USB specification (e.g. standard descriptors), while others
> don't (e.g. USB Audio class descriptors).
>
> Is it generally preferred that Wireshark follows names from the
> specification (e.g. bTerminalID) instead of coming up with our own
> (e.g. Terminal ID)? Should we unify the fields so all descriptor
> fields always use the display names from the respective specification?
>
> Best Regards,
> Tomasz Moń

While I think it is helpful to try to follow specification names, sometimes
they are too awkward.

However, I'm cautious about renaming fields "just because" as this will
likely break any scripts\workflows folks have that rely on the current
field names.

-- 
Graham Bloice

___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Archives:    https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe