As far as I know the Canadian sets have used "CA" since their inception, predating OGFX. Although just a recommendation, it is precisely for situations such as these that the recomendation was written.
I am aware of the convention to use your initials but it is a guideline nothing more.
Basically this means that if my name were Carlson Alfons I am screwed because someone used 6 out of 65000 possible IDs starting with CA.
I'd rather go buy this line ...
In principle, you are free what to use for the GRFID as long as you are sure it is unique,
but generally it is best to follow the above guidelines
If my name were really Carlson Alfons I'd be very sad to see my NewGRfs blocked because someone just invalidated "CA" completely and does not even intend to use it anymore which would make the sad feeling twice as bad.
IHMO the uniqueness of an ID is in relation to all 8 digits in the ID istead of claiming the the first 4 and everything that follows?
As for the IDs of OGFX ... I can not answer that ...
Maybe the one that assembled those NewGRFs used his own initials instead of following nrs?
In any case if/whenever my AI goes on bananas or If whenever I create a NewGRF myself of any other kind, I will pick the initials I please, without caring what has been picked before at all ... If I can not find a single file with the exact same GRFID and my mine is still conflicting or disabled a bug report goes up. (ofcourse I am not a troll and would not do it on purpose but still ...)
v1.6 GRFs have received a new GRFID (97 87 xx xx) and they all check for outdated versions and will disable them (if found activated) or disable themselves.
OpenGFX+ Airports 4.1 uses an unauthorized GRFID of 4341xxxx;
Wait what ... you claim 20000 ID's for 10 to 15 NewGRF's max or so? Even if you had 50 ... seems a bit overkill IMHO.
I claim all 65,535 in the range "43 41 xx xx" ('CA') and all 1,048,575 in the range "97 8x xx xx". The latter is not as much in danger as it uses non-printable characters.
I noticed my minor counting error after posting.
I was just wondering why would you do something like that at all?
Its not like there is anything to gain here at all or am I missing something?
... Do the 'invalid' / 'unauthorised' (according too you) NewGRFs get disabled when your new NewGRFs are not activated too?
Of course not. You can still use CanSet v0.2 if that fancies you. However, should you like to add CanCity v1.6 to the mix, then it will no longer be possible. A version 1.6 GRF will only disable outdated Canadian GRFs of the same type [e.g. CanRail v1.6 will disable CanRail/CanSet v0.1 through to v1.2 (anything with a version ID less than v1.6]); if other 'misfits' are found, it will disable itself [e.g. CanRail v1.6 will disable itself, if NARoads v1.1 has been activated]. This is per Action-E specification.
Thank you for clearing that up.
Maybe this should be a sepearte thread ... it is/was not my intention to de-rail the topic.
Inverted names in quotes
Hard return in codeblock to prevent tablebreaking too much.