[Wrtc] Roadmap v1.1

[Toni Lindén]

I think that copying the callsigns and exchanges is not the key thing in
this issue.
If I did understood correctly, the HQ stations are not identified as
multipliers, if they're not
listed in multiplier list by callsings.

Am I right?

73 de Toni, OH2UA




2006/5/15, John Crovelli <w2gd at hotmail.com>:
>
> All,
>
> To me this is a very minor issue.  I vote to leave out anything that
> assists with HQ callsigns or reports.  We are all very capable of copying
> and entering this information ourselves....and to expect an instant answer
> from the organizers at this time is not very reasonable.  So when in doubt -
> leave it out.  :-)
>
> I certainly see the reasoning from all points but better to be safe and
> move ahead without.
>
> 73,
>
> John W2GD/8
>
>  ------------------------------
> From:  *Laurent HAAS - F6FVY <f6fvy at free.fr>*
> Reply-To:  *Talks on WT improvements for the WRTC <wrtc at win-test.com>*
> To:  *Talks on WT improvements for the WRTC <wrtc at win-test.com>*
> Subject:  *Re: [Wrtc] Roadmap v1.1*
> Date:  *Mon, 15 May 2006 11:54:39 +0200*
>
>
> >Hi Matt
> >
> >Matt IZ3EYZ a écrit :
> >
> >>If you carefully read back to John's mail....the second posted on
> >>this reflector (after mine on WRTC reflector) he said:
> >>
> >>>Likewise, providing the Prefix/ITU zone match would also be very
> >>>helpful (subject to operator confirmation of the zone of course),
> >>>a feature provided by CT and others.  BUT, >providing the
> >>>abbrv/report for HQ stations is generally not available from other
> >>>programs.  It might be considered to be "assistance" by the WRTC
> >>>organizers and disallowed.
> >>
> >>
> >>"MIGHT BE CONSIDERED" .....he was assuming....but it's not a
> >>STATEMENT. I guess the better way to clear up this matter, if Oms
> >>or Thomas won't reply within tomorrow (I noticed they don't reply
> >>to mails during the weekends) is that you contact them directly off
> >>reflector.
> >
> >I fully agree with you on this : I would be very useful to get an
> >official (and *public*) WRTC committee judgement on this topic !
> >
> >>See WRTC FINAL RULES. Not a single word about "auto exchange field
> >>filling"!!!
> >>
> >>Allowing WT to recognize DA0HQ belongs to DARC is just like
> >>recognizing DL1XYZ belongs to Z 28.....
> >>Both are equally "auto exchange field filling".....if you can't
> >>allow HQs recognizing you also can't allow ITU zone
> >>recognizing.....
> >>
> >>Moreover  John points out that the "auto ITU ZONE filling" might be
> >>allowed cuz some other logging software are allowing it.
> >
> >In my humble opinion, in the WRTC, the "auto fill" from a list (HQ
> >callsigns or CTY.DAT) should *also* be prohibited. I consider it is
> >"against the ethics" of this very particular competition. But, most
> >of the time, it would imply the software writer to modify their
> >code.
> >
> >>Logic: if some other software allow ----->>>> WT can allow too.
> >>
> >>Sorry but it's not the right approach.....it's like I say: "only if
> >>others do something  I  can do it too" :-)))
> >>
> >>I assume "AUTO EXCHANGE FIELD FILLING" TOPIC is still wide open
> >>:-))
> >
> >Definitely ;-)  Let's wait the committee answer. We will stick to
> >it. But, if we don't get an answer before the competition, I'm
> >afraid we will not take the risk to potentially disqualify WT users
> >because of this feature.
> >
> >73
> >
> >Larry - F6FVY
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Wrtc mailing list
> >Wrtc at win-test.com
> >http://www.f5mzn.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/wrtc
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wrtc mailing list
> Wrtc at win-test.com
> http://www.f5mzn.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/wrtc
>
>
>


-- 

-.-. --.-   -.. .   --- .... ..--- ..- .-
Name:
Toni Lindén, OH2UA

Adr:
Kylätie 22A5
FIN 00320 Helsinki
Finland

Phone:
+358505867161

E-mail:
oh2ua at oh2u.com
.-.-.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.f5mzn.org/pipermail/wrtc/attachments/20060515/2c4fc8be/attachment.html