CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] A Plea to Cabrillo Contet Robot Writers

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] A Plea to Cabrillo Contet Robot Writers
From: "B. Scott Andersen" <bsandersen@mac.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 20:27:23 -0500
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Colleagues,

I am the author of Cab-converter, a tool that takes an ADIF file
and creates Cabrillo files for submission to contest sponsors.
You may find details about this tool from its Yahoo! support
group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cab-converter/

I have hesitated chiming earlier in this thread but perhaps now
would be a good time to do so. As someone who has spent many
hours working with the Cabrillo format, I have formed an opinion
about it... and it is not a positive one.

The "specification" is more like a weak collection of ideas than
anything definitive. I have plenty of specific complaints and
observations, but I think I've made my point.

Several ideas floated throughout this thread puzzled me.
Why would making a file that "rookie programmers" could parse
be an important design goal? At most, inexperienced programmers
may _produce_ such files, but it is unlikely any of them would ever
write software to _consume_ them.

Secondly, why is having a poor specification with significant
ambiguities helpful to inexperienced programmers (or _any_
programmers, for that matter!)?

Is it important that the contest submission file format (in this case
Cabrillo) be easily constructed by hand? That was one of the
original requirements, as I understood it. I contend that this is not
a reasonable requirement. There is no reason for contesters to
manually create a Cabrillo file when there are ample (FREE)
logging programs or add-on tools that will produce such a file for
them. Even if this was an original design goal, it need not continue
to be one.

I would very much like to see a serious discussion about moving
away from Cabrillo and towards a new file format standard that is
well-specified, consistent, unambiguous, platform independent,
and easily extensible to accommodate the changes and expansions
we know must be coming over the next few years or decades.
While this is probably not the list for such a design effort, this IS
the list and correct group of people to call for its creation. We are
the contesting community and set the tone, and in many ways,
set the goals and standards for how contests are conducted.

For those bored or flustered by the length of this thread (or my
post), I understand your point-of-view. But, this topic is not
unlike any other extremely specific topic (say on filters, or
SO2R) where you may not be directly using the technology or
even desire to learn more about it, but its existence is important
to contesting in general.  I hope you will bear with us while we
hash this out a bit more.

Thanks for the bandwidth

-- Scott (NE1RD and author of Cab-converter, among other things...)

PS I learned a new word today: "Turboencabulator".
Any day I learn a new word is a good day!


B. Scott Andersen  | "Magic is real, unless declared integer."
bsandersen@mac.com | -- The collected sayings of Wiz Zumwalt
Acton, MA (NE1RD)  | http://www.bsandersen.com


_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>