Re: ADIF import for Rovers


Joe Subich, W4TV
 

It seems to me the best solution is for N1MM+ to make the conversion from QSO party county abbreviation to correct ADIF CNTY tag when the
log is exported to ADIF. That ADIF log can then be easily uploaded
to LOTW.
Yes, it is best that N1MM+ export *ALL DATA* in ADIF standard format
rather than APP_N1MM_EXCHANGE# as it does presently. Unfortunately,
with State QSO Parties one has the additional complexity of handling
exchanges that are, themselves, not ADIF compliant - specifically
"independent cities" in Virginia, Maryland, and Nevada which are not
included in the ADIF enumerated counties.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 2021-03-18 10:25 AM, Alan Sewell wrote:
On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 09:00 AM, Scott Stembaugh wrote:
Actually there are 4 QPs that weekend, 7qp, inqp, neqp, and Delaware
qp.
>From a rover perspective, which is what this discussion is about, it
really doesn't matter how many QSO parties are on the same day.  If a rover is near enough that he could operate from two different QSO parties on the same day a different log will be used for each, whether you're using N1MM+ or another logging program.  Thus any overlap of abbreviations doesn't matter.
It seems to me the best solution is for N1MM+ to make the conversion from QSO party county abbreviation to correct ADIF CNTY tag when the log is exported to ADIF.  That ADIF log can then be easily uploaded to LOTW.
DXLab could take that ADIF and on import create a myQTHID if one doesn't exist for that state/county.
73, Alan N5NA

Join DXLab@groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.