[Wrtc] Roadmap v1.1

Tue May 16 01:35:18 CEST 2006

Yep!!

It wasn't my point to bring up the "auto filling" matter once again. I had to come back on this issue since Larry used John statement.

Besides, I think both ITU and HQ auto filling shouldn't be allowed in WRTC. I agree we can all copy them.....in any case my "brain.DTA" seems to work pretty well ;-))

The main and only item I pointed out is:

Actually WT doesn't recognize HQ stns are a mult when you pass 'em through DXC ann or bandmap window. It always happens when those HQs have not been worked before on any band/mode. Of course it also involves AC, R1, R2, R3 mults.

So:

a) there 's a huge chance to lose some mult and in IARU contest HQs are a great resource.

b) In order to see the spotted HQ stns you have not to set "mults only". It 'll show you those calls but you can't understand if they 're really a mult unless you look at HQ window or OP.B lets you know that. Anyway such a situation doesn't work if you want to interleave both Qs and mults.....

c) HQ window takes space on PC screen and I 'd like to use that for other stuff.

A possible solution:

An "hidden" database to allow WT HQ/AC mults recognizing would give WT the mult knowledge without showing "exchange guessing" to the operator. In other words WT knows DA0HQ is a mult....but you 're expected to copy DARC mult ;-)

....and it might make everybody happy :-))

73

Matt.EYZ
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Toni Lindén 
  To: Talks on WT improvements for the WRTC 
  Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 6:08 PM
  Subject: Re: [Wrtc] Roadmap v1.1

  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
  .-.-. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  _______________________________________________
  Wrtc mailing list
  Wrtc at win-test.com
  http://www.f5mzn.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/wrtc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.f5mzn.org/pipermail/wrtc/attachments/20060516/3c3b02f1/attachment.html