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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[WriteLog\]\s+Cabrillo\s*$/: 45 ]

Total 45 documents matching your query.

1. [WriteLog] Cabrillo (score: 1): Author: fab1@uq.net.au (Graeme Bracht vk4dz); Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 06:39:19 +1000; Hello All Sorry to ask but only had the program for 1 week so still = learning.The cabrillo option in the "contest" drop down menu is not = available. (greyed out) And if you go to the "export" menu; /archives//html/WriteLog/2002-05/msg00077.html (7,659 bytes)
2. [WriteLog] Cabrillo (score: 1): Author: doncassel@compuserve.com (Don Cassel); Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 17:43:36 -0400; Graeme, My experience has shown that WL does not support Cabrillo for every contest. This has always bugged me as it seems that it should be a standard output for every contest. Not so. Gud luck, Don; /archives//html/WriteLog/2002-05/msg00078.html (8,389 bytes)
3. [WriteLog] Cabrillo (score: 1): Author: George Johnson" <w1zt@arrl.net (George Johnson); Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 21:07:57 -0400; Graeme, The A. Volta contest requires logs in text file format by band. There was no reference to Cabrillo in their rules (yet). Rules are at: http://members.xoom.virgilio.it/rrc/ I prepared the logs; /archives//html/WriteLog/2002-05/msg00079.html (8,332 bytes)
4. [WriteLog] Cabrillo (score: 1): Author: scot@k9jy.com (Scot Herrick); Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 21:19:14 -0500; The rules for each contest drives the need or not for Cabrillo. If you have a 'Cabrillo' format for every contest and the rules require you to submit logs in something else, it's a total waste of tim; /archives//html/WriteLog/2002-05/msg00080.html (7,989 bytes)
5. [WriteLog] Cabrillo (score: 1): Author: doncassel@compuserve.com (Don Cassel); Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 07:35:49 -0400; Interesting comments. It seems that the new "Standard" is not really standard at all. I think the difference would only be in the fields required. ie. some would require a QSO # field others would no; /archives//html/WriteLog/2002-05/msg00095.html (10,489 bytes)
6. [WriteLog] Cabrillo (score: 1): Author: k4jrb@juno.com (Dave L Thompson); Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 15:19:30 -0400; Cabrillo was originally designed for ARRL Contests (that is why the ARRL Section). However CQ and other contests have adopted it as it provides a standard format (see www.kkn.net). This means the con; /archives//html/WriteLog/2002-05/msg00096.html (12,865 bytes)
7. [WriteLog] Cabrillo (score: 1): Author: jbrannig@optonline.net (Jim Brannigan); Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 15:59:50 -0400; Someone has got to pay for the programming. W/L has the major contests covered. I don't want to pay for the Upper Slobovian Yodelers club annual sprint Cabrillo module. Perhaps they could be made ava; /archives//html/WriteLog/2002-05/msg00097.html (10,956 bytes)
8. [WriteLog] Cabrillo (score: 1): Author: Steve Baron - KB3MM" <SteveBaron@starlinx.com (Steve Baron - KB3MM); Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 21:55:04 -0000; Even with the ARRL contests, the format is not constant.; /archives//html/WriteLog/2002-05/msg00098.html (14,569 bytes)
9. [WriteLog] Cabrillo (score: 1): Author: gbaron@charter.net (Gil Baron); Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 16:32:39 -0500; BUT he could do this once (LIKE TRLOG) and make a way to allow EASILY a USER to configure almost any contest. The best way to do it would be a GUI where you could set up almost any parameter you cou; /archives//html/WriteLog/2002-05/msg00099.html (12,980 bytes)
10. [WriteLog] Cabrillo (score: 1): Author: vk4cej@uq.net.au (John - vk4cej); Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 20:06:14 +1000; "the Upper Slobovian Yodelers club annual sprint" hey Jim, what date is thei one on ?? John (contest junkie with big grin) that the decides ... vk4dz; /archives//html/WriteLog/2002-05/msg00101.html (12,038 bytes)
11. [WriteLog] Cabrillo (score: 1): Author: bcross@bellatlantic.net (Bob Crossland); Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 22:05:53 +0000; Hi folks, I just tried generating the Cabrillo file for the BARTG contest but the option is not available (the word Cabrillo is there but is not selectable). What am I missing? I'm using version 10.1; /archives//html/WriteLog/2001-01/msg00336.html (6,703 bytes)
12. [WriteLog] Cabrillo (score: 1): Author: bcross@bellatlantic.net (Bob Crossland); Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 22:18:48 +0000; Please disregard my post. I found the answer in the Release notes of version 10.23. The Cabrillo generation for BARTG is addressed with this upgrade. I'm in the processing of upgrading at this time a; /archives//html/WriteLog/2001-01/msg00337.html (7,580 bytes)
13. [WriteLog] cabrillo (score: 1): Author: esalcedo@pworld.net.ph (Ed); Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 18:55:15 +0800; Hi Gang, Had a great time during CQWW using 10.21k. No problems, crashes, whatsoever. Just have a few questions though, why doesn't Writelog include the dupes and unclaimed QSOs in the Cabrillo outpu; /archives//html/WriteLog/2000-11/msg00432.html (7,959 bytes)
14. [WriteLog] cabrillo (score: 1): Author: k1uq@email.msn.com (MorseCode2000); Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 05:29:24 -0500; Cabrillo Format does not require (i.e. want) this type info. Dupes, etc. are determined from processing the data itself within your Cabrillo file. For details and explanation including FAQs, go to: h; /archives//html/WriteLog/2000-11/msg00434.html (9,063 bytes)
15. [WriteLog] cabrillo (score: 1): Author: esalcedo@pworld.net.ph (Ed); Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 04:51:21 +0800; But how can the dupes,etc. be processed when the data itself is not included in Writelog's Cabrillo output? 73 and Mabuhay! Ed - DU1ODX http://www.qsl.net/du1odx -- WWW: http://www.writelog.com/ Sub; /archives//html/WriteLog/2000-11/msg00445.html (9,546 bytes)
16. [WriteLog] cabrillo (score: 1): Author: wt4i@brevard.net (Bruce Lifter); Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 19:29:33 -0500; Dupes should be included in the Cabrillo format output. For our CQWW RTTY effort, we saved the file as Cabrillo format using Writelog and the dupes were included. 73, Bruce -- email address: wt4i@wt; /archives//html/WriteLog/2000-11/msg00449.html (7,868 bytes)
17. [WriteLog] cabrillo (score: 1): Author: esalcedo@pworld.net.ph (Ed); Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 09:12:57 +0800; How'd you do that? I saved my log as Cabrillo format and Writelog didn't include the dupes and unclaimed QSOs. I operated SOSB (15m) and had 1 Q in 20m, 4 in 10m, and about 8 dupes but Writelog just; /archives//html/WriteLog/2000-11/msg00451.html (8,224 bytes)
18. [WriteLog] cabrillo (score: 1): Author: Bruce A. King" <baking@gis.net (Bruce A. King); Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 20:32:09 -0500; I just double-checked my log. The dupes are in, but in Cabrillo format, they are not tagged as dupes, or out of band. It would be worth finding a dupe entry in your log, and confirming that it is the; /archives//html/WriteLog/2000-11/msg00452.html (9,350 bytes)
19. [WriteLog] cabrillo (score: 1): Author: k1uq@email.msn.com (MorseCode2000); Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 07:24:55 -0500; I disagree. WL does as it should in creating the Cabrillo file. It creates it to the spec. Your WL log shows the dupes, doesn't it? All it does then is export this same data into the format of Cabril; /archives//html/WriteLog/2000-11/msg00466.html (9,093 bytes)
20. [WriteLog] cabrillo (score: 1): Author: k5zd@ma.ultranet.com (Randy Thompson, K5ZD); Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 13:02:50 -0000; I would expect it to leave out the unclaimed QSOs and keep the dupes. Those logged dupes are important for the log checking process. Randy, K5ZD -- WWW: http://www.writelog.com/ Submissions: writelog; /archives//html/WriteLog/2000-11/msg00469.html (9,181 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2] [3]