Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[WriteLog\]\s+Cabrillo\s+file\s+version\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[WriteLog\]\s+Cabrillo\s+file\s+version\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. [WriteLog] Cabrillo file version (score: 1): Author: "Gary AL9A" <al9a@mtaonline.net>; Date: Sun, 6 May 2012 16:06:46 -0800; Meant to send this last week, but forgot. I've started noticing recently that several contest sponsors are requesting that Cabrillo files be created to V3.0 stamdards. Cabrillo files created with WL; /archives//html/WriteLog/2012-05/msg00014.html (7,743 bytes)
2. Re: [WriteLog] Cabrillo file version (score: 1): Author: "Randy Thompson K5ZD" <k5zd@charter.net>; Date: Sun, 06 May 2012 17:16:42 -0800; The version of Writelog I am using (11.04) creates Cabrillo files in v3.0 format. I think it has been this way for a long time. Randy, K5ZD _______________________________________________ WriteLog ma; /archives//html/WriteLog/2012-05/msg00015.html (8,944 bytes)
3. Re: [WriteLog] Cabrillo file version (score: 1): Author: "Gary AL9A" <al9a@mtaonline.net>; Date: Sun, 6 May 2012 16:58:05 -0800; Thanks for the correction Randy. My old age dotage is really beginning to show! The problem I've seen recently in Cabrillo files created with V2.0 resulted from using the adif2cabr converter, not WL!; /archives//html/WriteLog/2012-05/msg00017.html (9,518 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]