WW: small bug - 59A reports not allowed.


g4wjs
 

Currently working the excellent aurora here and in WW I can't enter 59A reports, DXK allows them so I can edit or use capture dialog but unless there is a config option to allow aurora reports in WW this seems to be a defect.

73
Bill.


Joe WB9SBD
 

591?
Joe WB9SBD

The Original Rolling Ball Clock
Idle Tyme
Idle-Tyme.com
http://www.idle-tyme.com

On 8/5/2011 6:15 PM, g4wjs wrote:

Currently working the excellent aurora here and in WW I can't enter
59A reports, DXK allows them so I can edit or use capture dialog but
unless there is a config option to allow aurora reports in WW this
seems to be a defect.

73
Bill.


Dave AA6YQ
 

AA6YQ comments below
-----Original Message-----
From: dxlab@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dxlab@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of
g4wjs
Sent: Friday, August 05, 2011 7:16 PM
To: dxlab@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [dxlab] WW: small bug - 59A reports not allowed.


Currently working the excellent aurora here and in WW I can't enter 59A
reports, DXK allows them so I can edit or use capture dialog but unless
there is a config option to allow aurora reports in WW this seems to be a
defect.

Please download the zip archive

I have sent you a new version of WinWarbler that's been extended to
accept alphanumeric characters in the "QSO Info" panel's RST Sent and Rcvd
textboxes. These textboxes also now interpret CTRL-A to mean "select current
contents".

Please let me know how it goes.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ


g4wjs
 

...
Please download the zip archive

I have sent you a new version of WinWarbler that's been extended to
accept alphanumeric characters in the "QSO Info" panel's RST Sent and Rcvd
textboxes. These textboxes also now interpret CTRL-A to mean "select current
contents".

Please let me know how it goes.
Seems to be not quite there Dave. I can enter 59A in sent and recieved report fields in both CW and SSB mode but when I try and log I get flashing red labels on both report fields. I guess there is some further validation when the log button is pressed. The 59A fields are transfering to DXK main and capture windows and the log button there does work as expected without failing validation.

It does seem strange that both applications might validate entries in this way - surely the destination (DXK) should be responsible for final full record validation alone and WW should only validate individual fields as they are entered?


73,

Dave, AA6YQ
73
Bill.


Dave AA6YQ
 

AA6YQ comments below
-----Original Message-----
From: dxlab@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dxlab@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of
g4wjs
Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2011 12:00 PM
To: dxlab@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [dxlab] Re: WW: small bug - 59A reports not allowed.


...
Please download the zip archive

I have sent you a new version of WinWarbler that's been extended to
accept alphanumeric characters in the "QSO Info" panel's RST Sent and Rcvd
textboxes. These textboxes also now interpret CTRL-A to mean "select
current
contents".

Please let me know how it goes.
Seems to be not quite there Dave. I can enter 59A in sent and recieved
report fields in both CW and SSB mode but when I try and log I get flashing
red labels on both report fields. I guess there is some further validation
when the log button is pressed. The 59A fields are transfering to DXK main
and capture windows and the log button there does work as expected without
failing validation.

It does seem strange that both applications might validate entries in this
way - surely the destination (DXK) should be responsible for final full
record validation alone and WW should only validate individual fields as
they are entered?

No, because WinWarbler is capable of logging QSOs to an ADIF file without
DXKeeper being present; thus WinWarbler must perform validity checking.

The next version of WinWarbler accepts sent and rcvd signal reports
between 2 and 8 characters in length where the first character is required
to be an integer less than or equal to 5, with no constraints on the
following characters.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ


Joe Subich, W4TV
 

The next version of WinWarbler accepts sent and rcvd signal reports
between 2 and 8 characters in length where the first character is
required to be an integer less than or equal to 5, with no
constraints on the following characters.
I would extend that to "and second character must be an integer between
1 and 9" ... or eliminate all of the error checking since JT65 reports
generally absolute levels that begin with a '-' sign. Yes, I know that
WW does not currently support JT65.

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 8/6/2011 4:35 PM, Dave AA6YQ wrote:
AA6YQ comments below
-----Original Message-----
From: dxlab@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dxlab@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of
g4wjs
Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2011 12:00 PM
To: dxlab@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [dxlab] Re: WW: small bug - 59A reports not allowed.


...
Please download the zip archive

I have sent you a new version of WinWarbler that's been extended to
accept alphanumeric characters in the "QSO Info" panel's RST Sent and Rcvd
textboxes. These textboxes also now interpret CTRL-A to mean "select
current
contents".

Please let me know how it goes.
Seems to be not quite there Dave. I can enter 59A in sent and recieved
report fields in both CW and SSB mode but when I try and log I get flashing
red labels on both report fields. I guess there is some further validation
when the log button is pressed. The 59A fields are transfering to DXK main
and capture windows and the log button there does work as expected without
failing validation.

It does seem strange that both applications might validate entries in this
way - surely the destination (DXK) should be responsible for final full
record validation alone and WW should only validate individual fields as
they are entered?

No, because WinWarbler is capable of logging QSOs to an ADIF file without
DXKeeper being present; thus WinWarbler must perform validity checking.

The next version of WinWarbler accepts sent and rcvd signal reports
between 2 and 8 characters in length where the first character is required
to be an integer less than or equal to 5, with no constraints on the
following characters.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ




------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links




Paul M Dunphy
 

At 06:20 PM 8/6/2011, you wrote:

>>>> The next version of WinWarbler accepts sent and rcvd signal reports
between 2 and 8 characters in length where the first character is
required to be an integer less than or equal to 5, with no
constraints on the following characters.
I would extend that to "and second character must be an integer between
1 and 9" ... or eliminate all of the error checking since JT65 reports
generally absolute levels that begin with a '-' sign. Yes, I know that
WW does not currently support JT65.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

I was going to ask that -- haven't been following the thread closely, but just want to be sure that regardless of what WW does, DXK will still accept reports like -12 and the like. i.e. this is just a restriction on an integer <= 5 being imposed within WW?

73, Paul VE1DX


Dave AA6YQ
 

AA6YQ comments below
-----Original Message-----
From: dxlab@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dxlab@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of
Joe Subich, W4TV
Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2011 5:21 PM
To: dxlab@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [dxlab] Re: WW: small bug - 59A reports not allowed.



>>>> The next version of WinWarbler accepts sent and rcvd signal reports
between 2 and 8 characters in length where the first character is
required to be an integer less than or equal to 5, with no
constraints on the following characters.
I would extend that to "and second character must be an integer between
1 and 9" ... or eliminate all of the error checking since JT65 reports
generally absolute levels that begin with a '-' sign. Yes, I know that
WW does not currently support JT65.

I'll add the "second character must be an integer between 1 and 9"
constraint because this is appropriate for all modes that WinWarbler
supports. I don't understand why all validity checking should be abandoned
to permit the logging of QSOs in a mode that WinWarbler doesn't support.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ


Dave AA6YQ
 

AA6YQ comments below
-----Original Message-----
From: dxlab@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dxlab@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of
Paul M Dunphy
Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2011 5:31 PM
To: dxlab@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [dxlab] Re: WW: small bug - 59A reports not allowed.


At 06:20 PM 8/6/2011, you wrote:

>>>> The next version of WinWarbler accepts sent and rcvd signal reports
between 2 and 8 characters in length where the first character is
required to be an integer less than or equal to 5, with no
constraints on the following characters.
I would extend that to "and second character must be an integer between
1 and 9" ... or eliminate all of the error checking since JT65 reports
generally absolute levels that begin with a '-' sign. Yes, I know that
WW does not currently support JT65.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

I was going to ask that -- haven't been following the thread
closely, but just want to be sure that regardless of what WW does,
DXK will still accept reports like -12 and the like. i.e. this is
just a restriction on an integer <= 5 being imposed within WW?

Yes, the restrictions being discussed are "WinWarbler-only", as it's
limited to logging Phone, CW, PSK, and RTTY QSOs. DXKeeper supports logging
of a much wider range of modes, and thus will not be modified to impose the
signal report constraints being discussed here.

The reason WinWarbler imposes these constraints, by the way, is to alert
the operator to the presence of an error caused by mis-typing or by
double-clicking an imperfectly-decoded signal report.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ


Joe Subich, W4TV
 

I'll add the "second character must be an integer between 1 and
9" constraint because this is appropriate for all modes that
WinWarbler supports. I don't understand why all validity checking
should be abandoned to permit the logging of QSOs in a mode that
WinWarbler doesn't support.
Only in case someone was using WW instead of the Capture screen ...

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 8/6/2011 5:38 PM, Dave AA6YQ wrote:
AA6YQ comments below
-----Original Message-----
From: dxlab@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dxlab@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of
Joe Subich, W4TV
Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2011 5:21 PM
To: dxlab@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [dxlab] Re: WW: small bug - 59A reports not allowed.



>>>> The next version of WinWarbler accepts sent and rcvd signal reports
between 2 and 8 characters in length where the first character is
required to be an integer less than or equal to 5, with no
constraints on the following characters.
I would extend that to "and second character must be an integer between
1 and 9" ... or eliminate all of the error checking since JT65 reports
generally absolute levels that begin with a '-' sign. Yes, I know that
WW does not currently support JT65.

I'll add the "second character must be an integer between 1 and 9"
constraint because this is appropriate for all modes that WinWarbler
supports. I don't understand why all validity checking should be abandoned
to permit the logging of QSOs in a mode that WinWarbler doesn't support.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ




------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links




N1BUG
 

On 08/06/2011 05:38 PM, Dave AA6YQ wrote:

I don't understand why all validity checking should be abandoned
to permit the logging of QSOs in a mode that WinWarbler doesn't
support.

WinWarbler supports Phone, but wouldn't accept reports for meteor
scatter contacts made using that mode, where the report would
typically be S2. WinWarbler supports CW, but wouldn't accept reports
for EME contacts made using that mode, where the report is usually O
or M. Yes, some people still use these modes for such 'exotic' means
of communication, even in this day of digital modes. There may be
other examples of which I am unaware or still too sleepy to think of
right now.

73,
Paul N1BUG


Dave AA6YQ
 

+++ more AA6YQ comments below

-----Original Message-----
From: dxlab@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dxlab@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of
N1BUG
Sent: Sunday, August 07, 2011 7:43 AM
To: dxlab@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [dxlab] Re: WW: small bug - 59A reports not allowed.




On 08/06/2011 05:38 PM, Dave AA6YQ wrote:

I don't understand why all validity checking should be abandoned
to permit the logging of QSOs in a mode that WinWarbler doesn't
support.
WinWarbler supports Phone, but wouldn't accept reports for meteor
scatter contacts made using that mode, where the report would
typically be S2. WinWarbler supports CW, but wouldn't accept reports
for EME contacts made using that mode, where the report is usually O
or M. Yes, some people still use these modes for such 'exotic' means
of communication, even in this day of digital modes. There may be
other examples of which I am unaware or still too sleepy to think of
right now.

+++ Adverse as I am to adding new configuration options, the nasty tradeoff
between not flagging invalid signal reports and preventing the accurate
logging of PHONE or CW QSOs in meteor scatter or EME modes seems to require
a new "Flag nonstandard signal reports" option that on installation defaults
to "enabled".

73,

Dave, AA6YQ


N1BUG
 

On 08/07/2011 01:58 PM, Dave AA6YQ wrote:

+++ Adverse as I am to adding new configuration options, the nasty
tradeoff
between not flagging invalid signal reports and preventing the
accurate
logging of PHONE or CW QSOs in meteor scatter or EME modes seems
to require
a new "Flag nonstandard signal reports" option that on
installation defaults
to "enabled".

As you wish, Dave. I wasn't asking for a change so much as pointing
out what seemed to be a minor inconsistency.
VHFers (and perhaps some other special interest groups) come up with
some weird signal reporting standards. :-)

73,
Paul N1BUG