On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 6:22 AM Lassi Kortela <xxxxxx@lassi.io> wrote:
 
Personally, I'm pleased with the way this format turned out and would
consider it almost done for publication. If you want any changes or
additions, please don't hesitate to say so :) 

Could you and Ciprian work together on coming up with a proposed format that would satisfy your combined goals?  The idea would be to encode all the information your code is already able to extract, in addition to the manually added category information, while being extensible to support the more detailed type information, for example, that Ciprian envisions.  There's no need to specify exactly how that detailed type information, etc. would be encoded — just how a place would be held in the format so that it could be added later.

I'm happy to participate in the discussion, too, and to have other people contribute as well.  But you both have thought about this carefully, so it would be nice to have you two take the lead.

What do you both think?