[UK-CONTEST] RSGB Cabrillo update

[Clive Whelan]

 G3Sjj wrote:
> 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.
>

This is so obvious, that it shouldn't need saying at all, but 
clearly it does; Chris is 100% correct. The RSGB/HFCC *must* 
address these issues ( in fact I believe they are, so why not 
say so: is it a secret?). Bottom line for 
me is that my choice of logging software is more important than 
any RSGB contest, so if e.g. what WL can produce is not 
acceptable, I'm outa here.

> 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
>

I can only answer for the contest that I adjudicate viz ROPOCO, 
where the entire exchange is checked (pretty obvious I think). I 
don't want to set Ray/G4FON up, but I am certain that if the 
exchange is in the Cabrillo file, then his excellent Logmangler 
software can hack the file. The problem of file standardisation 
is a joint responsibility of the logging software vendor and 
the specific contest sponsor, categorically *not* the contest 
entrant. Contests which fail to accept this realism, will simply 
wither on the vine. My I suggest that RSGB international 
contests are not in rude health , and may not survive many bad 
harvests?

73

Clive
GW3NJW