[UK-CONTEST] RSGB Cabrillo update

[G3SJJ]

I don't have any problem with that Ian but Paul appears to be confusing the
issue by insisting the software writers must do something.

The way I have used logging programs up to now for RSGB Contests is to
choose a major contest format that allows me to enter the incoming exchange.
WPX for AFS, I just can't remember what I used for SSB FD but it handled the
multipliers ok. At the end of the contest, using NA, I type ALT X and then
Write and it produces various files, one of which is the .LOG file. That now
has the familiar Cabrillo style summary header with each QSO line beginning
something like "QSO:" That is the file I submit without any modification.
Any changes I need to make would be done in NA before I hit Write.

Writelog is a bit different as I found with CW AFS. I used DXpedition format
which then had Cabrillo greyed out in the menu. Since I suspected I was
amongst the leaders I felt it encumbent on me to submit a "Cabrillo" style
file so I re-typed my log in using WPX format and after several checks
finding a number of keying in errors(!), hit the Cabrillo button and
produced the customary file. (I didn't make the same mistake with SSB AFS!)

I know Don has said the new rules will not be enforced this year so I am
relaxed about my entries. What I must say though is that I cannot see why I
need to do anything else. I am using up-to-date world recognised software,
after some 10 years or so of computer logging I am satisfied that what I
produce is the correct format so :

1 - I should not have to contact the software writer and
2 - I should not have to modify the file.

Again the question I would ask is just how much information is
cross-checked? Is it just callsign? Is it callsign and serial number? Or is
it the full exchanged data ie callsign, serial number and (say in Club
Calls) the Club name? If so how would the checking software react to the
examples I gave before, Newbury and District Amateur Radio Club, Newbury &
DARC? Some answers please.

Chris G3SJJ

-----Original Message-----
From: uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com
[mailto:uk-contest-bounces at contesting.com]On Behalf Of Ian White, G3SEK
Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2003 6:31 PM
To: uk-contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] RSGB Cabrillo update


G3SJJ Wrote:

>Come on Paul, let's get a bit of sense into this discussion. You are
>not really suggesting, are you, that someone approaches W5XD or K8CC
>and ask them to spend their time writing cabrillo format because a few
>people in the UK want to continue to use the programs of their choice?
>

There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding about what "Cabrillo" is.
It's a system of individual log *templates* provided by contest
organisers, so that contest software can produce a log in the required
format.

The software authors don't have to "write Cabrillo format" for every
contest. That's not the way it works. But any competent contest program
ought to have an easy way to input *any* Cabrillo template, and then be
able to organise the logged information into that format.

That's the way it has to go, because even in the USA there are many
small state QSO Parties etc with individualistic rules, and even
American software authors can't ignore the rest of the world's contests
forever.

Don Field's article about Cabrillo on the HFCC website makes all this
very clear.

So, the HFCC has done exactly the right thing to publish its templates
for the year's contests. In contrast, there are still some contest
organisers who talk about submitting logs in "the Cabrillo format" (as
if there was just the one)... which only shows that they don't have a
clue.

As was said last time we discussed this, we're in a stage of transition.
Contest organisers and software authors have still a lot to learn and
do... but in a couple of years we'll wonder what all the fuss was about.


--
73 from Ian G3SEK
_______________________________________________
UK-Contest mailing list
UK-Contest at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest