At 12:42 AM 1/7/2006, VR2BrettGraham wrote:
>Cabrillo _was_ a great idea, but it's falling apart because so many
>have run off with it on their own. v3 looks to be an attempt to deal
>with failure to work with what is already specified. Just look at lists
>of logs received to see just how non-compliant logs are being sent
>to just ARRL (a major reason why we have Cabrillo). I recently tried
>to work with a CQ WW log done with a logging product of some
>significance & here we have a major product that has its own idea of a
>QSO template.
Brett, you're comparing apples and oranges here. If something is
defined in the kkn.net spec, but some logging program produces
non-compliant output, that's a different problem than if someone
adopts the format FOR THEIR CONTEST, develops their own QSO template,
and accepts log submissions compliant to THAT TEMPLATE.
Anyway, I have changed the web page slightly to make it more clear as
to what is Cabrillo and what is "Cabrillo".
http://www.ad1c.us/contest-id.htm
73 - Jim AD1C
--
Jim Reisert AD1C, 7 Charlemont Court, North Chelmsford, MA 01863
USA +978-251-9933, <jjreisert@alum.mit.edu>, http://www.ad1c.us
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|