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

Sat Jan 13 02:57:57 EST 2007

Hello,

it is nice discussion, but many of you see the Cabrillo problem only from a contest entrant point of view. Now let see the Cabrillo from point of view of a non-CQ or non-ARRL contest organizer/sponsor. At the beginning I have to point out I really know what I am going to  write about, because I was heavily involved in development of the log checking SW for OK/OM DX Contest several years ago. Here are some comments regarding Cabrillo and things around it:

1. Cabrillo spec can be found here: http://www.kkn.net/~trey/cabrillo. Please study carefully the documents there and let me know  if you were able to find there information such as who is the maintainer (read as "official contact person") of this standard. Or whom you have to contact if you have prepared a cabrillo template for your contest and now you would like to see it included among templates shown on that page. Or better I would like to see a description of exact procedure which you should follow if you want to adopt Cabrillo for your contest and want to see your template on the Cabrillo specification web page.

2. Cabrillo is now de-facto standard for HF contest logs. Not sure whether it was the goal of the Cabrillo authors, because as far as I remember the initial comments were that it is new log format for CQ and ARRL contests. The authors probably know what are their needs for CQ and ARRL contests, but I wonder how much they care about needs of other contest organizers. For example since last year we have Cabrillo version 3.0. Nice, many changes we made. But was there any serious public discussion before? I do not know about any.

I will not comment internal format of Cabrillo, because it would be too long. I will write only this. AFAIK the main reason why the Cabrillo has been born is to have a logfile format which it would be easy to import into the log checking systems. I have seen many cabrillo files produced by many contest logging programs and different versions of these programs. A have also written parsers for native logs from CT, TRLog, SD, ADIF and some more. From this experience I have learned it is MUCH EASIER to write a ROBUST parser any native log format than for the Cabrillo. And in general it is even easier (or at least not more difficult) to maintain several parsers for native log formats than one for Cabrillo. Please note word ROBUST, which means the parser is able to process succesfully many different versions of Cabrillo STANDARD logs. And for those suggesting to use ADIF - to parse an ADIF is even worse.

So finally, I can sign what NE1RD wrote recently on the topic.

73
Zdenek OK1DSZ
BTW. 10+ years of C/C++ professional programing  experience

> Gents,
> 
> Before taking decisions on Cabrillo it would be nice to find out:
> 
> - what contesters would gain with an implemention of a new standard
> - would it be worth extra expenses for updating the commercial contest 
> software
> - would the new standard allow a non-computer geek accessing the log to 
> eventually edit it manually. So far one can easily edit the Cabrillo file, 
> like correcting weird call-signs or just adding a couple of log lines in a 
> matter of seconds using a simple text file editor
> - would such an access require extra software. Please don't forget, for 
> example, the M$ Excel mentionned here costs quite some money and it is not 
> supplied just in the Windows pack...
> - how much would it affect the Internet traffic. Some prople still use 
> dial-up or so, and uploading 10 k or 1 MB file matters...
> 
> And finally, or perhaps first of all, tell us non-geeks what you want to 
> fix? Is the "problem" of non-existing RST in a log worth such a headache?
> 
> 73,
> 
> Vladimir VE3IAE
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > Unfortunately, the problem here is not a technical one, but a "political" 
> > or
> > "change" one. For a new format to be successful, it MUST be adopted by 
> > both
> > ARRL and CQ.  CQ is tough because it has 6 different contestlog checkers 
> > who
> > operate somewhat independently.
> >
> > The only thing that will drive change is a recognized problem.  Right now,
> > most people happily submit their logs and know almost nothing about the
> > limitations of Cabrillo.  Nor do they really need to (except when the 
> > robot
> > barks).  The log checkers seem to be happy too (thanks to the robot 
> > helping
> > enforce proper formatting).
> >
> > So... The tech guys should create the framework for something better
> > (preferably on some other list). But, they should not expect people to 
> > just
> > accept it.  A long period of sales will be needed to convince the powers 
> > at
> > ARRL and CQ that there will be a benefit to changing.
> >
> > K5ZD
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com
> >> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of B.
> >> Scott Andersen
> >> Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 1:27 AM
> >> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> >> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] A Plea to Cabrillo Contet Robot Writers
> >>
> >> 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 at mac.com | -- The collected sayings of Wiz Zumwalt
> >> Acton, MA (NE1RD)  | http://www.bsandersen.com
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> CQ-Contest mailing list
> >> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> >> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> > 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> 
> 
> 