Most of the Softwasre on the market , payware or freeware, generate cabrillo
WRTC rules need to create a new Contest profile due differents rules, and
there is enough time
to build up this new profile and generate a compliant cabrillo file that
could/can be checked from
the WRTC commitee to accept it or not.
Remember that WL is popular but other software has different features and
forcing the use WL
could be a penality for the competitors.
N1MM Logger, Win-Test, even CT , TR and NA have all the capabilities to
generate a compliant
Cabrillo file. In the last 3 WRTC i had show all the developer be coperative
with the WRTC commitees
why this time not ??
73 de Fabio I4UFH
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stuart Santelmann KC1F" <email@example.com>
To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>; "VR2BrettGraham" <email@example.com>
Sent: Friday, April 08, 2005 2:00 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] WRTC 2006 and Writelog
> > I can understand how Cabrillo is a mess for non-mainstream events -
> > but how can we _still_ be having problems (whatever they may be)
> > so many years on for something like IARU?
> > What is so difficult about implementing what is in the spec?
> > 73, VR2BrettGraham
> My memory is a little fuzzy on this, as I was a referee in 2002 and didn't
> use the program, but wasn't the problem with the *special* version of the
> software needed for WRTC teams with the different scoring, and not the
> regular version ? People spent the days in Finland up to the contest
> to break the software, to make sure it would be ready. I also seem to
> remember that about 48 of the 52 teams used CT with no problem, and that a
> non-trivial scoring problem with *another* software was noted in
> mid-contest.. Someone correct me as necessary...
> Hope to see you all in Brazil !
> Stu KC1F
> CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest mailing list