So what does X-QSO do to a log line?
Ken K6MR
From: Tree<mailto:tree@kkn.net>
Sent: Monday, December 5, 2016 11:37 AM
To: Lee STRAHAN<mailto:k7tjr@msn.com>
Cc: Ward Silver<mailto:hwardsil@gmail.com>;
topband@contesting.com<mailto:topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: ARRL 160
There is no way to mark a QSO as unclaimed in the Cabrillo format.
Either it is there or not.
The correct thing to do is have the log submitted with what was copied
during the contest. It is also correct for the Web App to not delete the
QSO. In this case - it flagged it - and perhaps prevented submission of
the log without it being corrected - but I think this is not the right
thing.
Submitting the log via via email to 160meter@arrl.org bypasses the web app
- and in this case will allow the log to be submitted as is.
And in any case - if you find you are having issues - you can contact the
ARRL for help.
73 Tree N6TR (who is also the log checker for most - if not all - of the
160 meter contests)
On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 11:31 AM, Lee STRAHAN <k7tjr@msn.com> wrote:
> That's all OK Ward but the guy on the other end will not get credit for
> the correct QSO. Not right also.
> I chose to mark the QSO as unclaimed as that hopefully will deal with it
> correctly?
> Lee K7TJR OR
>
> >>
> If the web upload app for log submission finds something in a QSO: line it
> can't deal with...
>
> > The ARRL submission AP tells you to correct the mistakes rather than
> remove or unclaim them and that is NOT RIGHT!
>
> Point of clarification - the app does not really know anything about a
> particular call. It just knows that the data it found in what it thought
> was a call sign field did not look like a call sign. (You would get a
> similar error if the Sent Call data is bad or the RST isn't an
> RST.) It is up to the log submitter as to what to do about that. If the
> QSO: line is just mis-formatted, rearranging the information to satisfy the
> Cabrillo format is perfectly OK. If the call sign is busted (from typo,
> mis-copy, or whatever), my suggestion would be to remove the line
> entirely. Same thing if the the section abbreviation is not valid.
>
> 73, Ward N0AX
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
|