According to [log in to unmask]:
>From [log in to unmask] Fri Mar  1 08:41 EST 1996
>From: [log in to unmask]
>Organization:  Crop Science, The Univ. of Guelph
>To: "Dr. Gerrit Hoogenboom" <[log in to unmask]>
>Date:          Fri, 1 Mar 1996 08:35:22 EDT
>Subject:       Re: sq res
>Priority: normal
>X-Mailer:     Pegasus Mail v3.1 (R1a)
>Message-Id: <[log in to unmask]>
>Content-Type: text
>Content-Length: 6916
>
>Received: from MAILQ by CSNET (Mercury 1.21); 29 Feb 96 17:46:16 GMT-5
>Return-path: <[log in to unmask]>
>Received: from uga.cc.uga.edu by csnet.nw.uoguelph.ca (Mercury 1.21);
>    29 Feb 96 17:46:02 GMT-5
>Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU by uga.cc.uga.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R3)
>   with BSMTP id 3545; Thu, 29 Feb 96 17:49:17 EST
>Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@UGA) by UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 4556; Thu, 29 Feb 1996 17:49:17 -0500
>Date:         Thu, 29 Feb 1996 17:49:17 -0500
>From:         "L-Soft list server at UGA (1.8b)" <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject:      Rejected posting to [log in to unmask]
>To:           [log in to unmask]
>X-PMFLAGS: 33554560
>
>You  are   not  authorized  to   send  mail  to   the  DSSAT  list   from  your
>[log in to unmask] account.  You might  be authorized to  send to  the list
>from another of your accounts, or perhaps when using another mail program which
>generates slightly  different addresses, but  LISTSERV has no way  to associate
>this other account or address with yours. If you need assistance or if you have
>any question  regarding the policy of  the DSSAT list, please  contact the list
>owners: [log in to unmask]
>
>------------------------ Rejected message (116 lines) -------------------------
>Return-Path: <[log in to unmask]>
>Received: from UGA (NJE origin SMTPIN@UGA) by UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3108; Thu, 29 Feb 1996 17:49:16 -0500
>Received: from ccshst06.cs.uoguelph.ca by uga.cc.uga.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R3)
>   with TCP; Thu, 29 Feb 96 17:49:15 EST
>Received: from csnet.nw.uoguelph.ca by ccshst06.cs.uoguelph.ca with ESMTP
>        (1.37.109.16/16.2) id AA229900117; Thu, 29 Feb 1996 16:41:57 -0500
>Received: from CSNET/MAILQ by csnet.nw.uoguelph.ca (Mercury 1.21);
>    29 Feb 96 16:37:42 GMT-5
>Received: from MAILQ by CSNET (Mercury 1.21); 29 Feb 96 16:37:40 GMT-5
>From: <[log in to unmask]>
>Organization:  Crop Science, The Univ. of Guelph
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Date:          Thu, 29 Feb 1996 16:37:33 EDT
>Subject:       Message from Frits van Evert re.Dssat files
>Priority: normal
>X-Mailer:     Pegasus Mail v3.1 (R1a)
>Message-Id: <[log in to unmask]>
>
>X-cs:
>From:     Self <CSNET/THUNT>
>To:       [log in to unmask]
>Subject:  DSSAT files
>Date:     Thu, 29 Feb 1996 16:25:25
>
>Dear Dr.van Evert,
>                  Jim Jones passed along your email message
>concerning the DSSAT files. I really appreciate your interest as my
>thrust with the IBSNAT group as well as with the new ICASA group
>(bringing together personnel from Ibsnat and Wageningen and possibly
>also the Australians) has been to ensure that the files are not just
>for modellers but serve equally well for experimenters. Convergence
>of experimental documentation structures and model input structures
>would mean that an experiment could be modelled directly without any
>need for data 'massaging' or re-casting, but perhaps of more
>significance is the fact that definition of what is required for
>experimental documentation and of structures to hold the information
>will mean that we will be able to conserve experimental information
>and use it 'down the line' so to speak - something that we have found
>very hard to do with past experiments.
>     Enough of the general 'stuff' and to more specific aspects. We
>have endeavoured to design the files such that they can capture the
>whole of the information that traditionally has been entered into
>logbooks, and my 'crew' now use the files to add info and notes as we
>proceed throught the season. The so-called X-files contain all of the
>management and general information, and their creation is not onerous
>as we generally duplicate an existing one or a template and proceed
>from there. In the X-files there is a general section that has
>specific spots for the plot size and layout information, as you may
>be able to see from the attached file UCEA8801.CEX. Spots for
>objectives,goal,methods,and instrumentation have not been
>specifically defined ... we considered them but left them for the
>'notes' section.  An ICASA working group is currently updating the
>definitions and your comments could lead us to add specific '@ lines'
>in the general section to cover these aspects. Do you think it would
>be worthwhile or would the notes section be adequate? My own feeling
>is that we should define some new @headings which then could be used
>or not depending on an individuals wish. I would be prepared
>to suggest the following to the ICASA group:
>              @OBJECTIVES
>              @GOALS
>              @MEASUREMENT METHODS
>              @INSTRUMENTS
>              @DESIGN
>with a question in my mind about a specific indicator for
>'implementation'. What would you include in implementation that could
>not be covered in 'notes' ?? Perhaps also, how do you separate
>'objectives' from 'goals'.
>     Moving now to data from the experiment. We have defined a number
>of files as follows and as mentioned in my paper in a CODATA book:
>     P or plot files with replicate data as taken in a standard
>       agronomy,crop phys or soils experiment
>     A or averages files - averages from the above as used for much
>       model evaluation
>     D or date files with replicate data arranged by date as may be
>       necessary for some physiology or soil studies in which the
>       same aspect is measured several times during a crop or annual
>       cycle.
>     T or time-course files - averages from the above as used for
>       model evaluation,etc..
>Your concern about raw data has thus been taken into account, as
>also is your concern relative to details of the rep, block, etc
>arrangement, which is stored along with the raw data.
>   A few further aspects. Currently we have defined a number of
>separate files but are moving to be able to combine these separate
>'data units' into one file if  required, which may ease storage and
>transfer to others. We developed software to take all the information
>from various files and enter into a standard relational database set
>of files (DBF) but have abandoned this as being unnecessary, and now
>put emphasis on the ASCII files serving as the main repository of
>information, but with software to extract some key information (
>easily identified by the @structure) and put this into database files
>that can be searched, sorted,etc. This is what is in the data section
>of the DSSAT3 package.
>   Enough! but let me again thank you for your interest .. I will
>look forward to hearing from you to clarify what you think needs to
>be added to be able to store the entire protocol. For interest, I
>will append a P and a D file - the former from co-operative work
>with John Wiersma from Crookston.
>Best regards  ....  L.A.(Tony) Hunt
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Attachments:
>  B:\UCEA8801.CEX
>  B:\MCCR9201.WHP
>  B:\NSFR9502.WHD
>
>