SC split spot


g4wjs
 

Hi

just clicked a spot for VK9CZ on 28012.5 that had been splitting sensibly but when the spot:

2013-04-04 11:06 de YO6HSU (EU) : up 28.015,27 599

got added to the pile the split went to 28040.5.

Obviously the the mix of digit separators has confused SC but I believe it should have made a better stab at this one or ignored it.

73
Bill.


Richard B Drake
 

When one uses the "UP" notation spot notes the number that follows is the frequency increment. In this case that would be 28012.5 + 28.015 which is 28040.5. If an absolute split frequency is being provided in spot notes the correct notation would be QSX 28.015 . I think SpotCollector did as well as it could given the odd notation that YO6HSU used.

73, Rich - W3ZJ

g4wjs wrote:

Hi

just clicked a spot for VK9CZ on 28012.5 that had been splitting sensibly but when the spot:

2013-04-04 11:06 de YO6HSU (EU) : up 28.015,27 599

got added to the pile the split went to 28040.5.

Obviously the the mix of digit separators has confused SC but I believe it should have made a better stab at this one or ignored it.

73
Bill.



g4wjs
 

--- In dxlab@..., "g4wjs" <bill.8@...> wrote:

Hi

just clicked a spot for VK9CZ on 28012.5 that had been splitting sensibly but when the spot:

2013-04-04 11:06 de YO6HSU (EU) : up 28.015,27 599

got added to the pile the split went to 28040.5.

Obviously the the mix of digit separators has confused SC but I believe it should have made a better stab at this one or ignored it.
I've just seen another that could perhaps be better. 5W0M spotted on 28028 with the following note:

2013-04-05 09:20 de UA4PCM (EU) : +3 around

but SC doesn't determine a split operation.


73
Bill.
73
Bill.


Dave AA6YQ
 

AA6YQ comments below
-----Original Message-----
From: dxlab@... [mailto:dxlab@...] On Behalf Of g4wjs
Sent: Friday, April 05, 2013 5:40 AM
To: dxlab@...
Subject: [dxlab] Re: SC split spot



--- In dxlab@..., "g4wjs" <bill.8@...> wrote:

Hi

just clicked a spot for VK9CZ on 28012.5 that had been splitting sensibly but when the spot:

2013-04-04 11:06 de YO6HSU (EU) : up 28.015,27 599

got added to the pile the split went to 28040.5.

Obviously the the mix of digit separators has confused SC but I believe it should have made a better stab at this one or ignored
it.

I've just seen another that could perhaps be better. 5W0M spotted on 28028 with the following note:

2013-04-05 09:20 de UA4PCM (EU) : +3 around

but SC doesn't determine a split operation.

SpotCollector thought that was a WX report.
73,

Dave, AA6YQ


g4wjs
 

--- In dxlab@..., "Dave AA6YQ" <aa6yq@...> wrote:

AA6YQ comments below
-----Original Message-----
From: dxlab@... [mailto:dxlab@...] On Behalf Of g4wjs
Sent: Friday, April 05, 2013 5:40 AM
To: dxlab@...
Subject: [dxlab] Re: SC split spot



--- In dxlab@..., "g4wjs" <bill.8@> wrote:

Hi

just clicked a spot for VK9CZ on 28012.5 that had been splitting sensibly but when the spot:

2013-04-04 11:06 de YO6HSU (EU) : up 28.015,27 599

got added to the pile the split went to 28040.5.

Obviously the the mix of digit separators has confused SC but I believe it should have made a better stab at this one or ignored
it.

I've just seen another that could perhaps be better. 5W0M spotted on 28028 with the following note:

2013-04-05 09:20 de UA4PCM (EU) : +3 around

but SC doesn't determine a split operation.

SpotCollector thought that was a WX report.
Oh, ok. I can imagine the code to decode random comments gives somewhat fuzzy results. I suppose that is credible in UA4 in early April, also the spot was busted anyway since the DX was on 28026 UP 3 ;)

How about the first one, the number given is a well formatted frequency in kHz in any country that uses ',' as a DP and '.' as a 000's separator.


73,

Dave, AA6YQ
73
Bill.


Dave AA6YQ
 

AA6YQ comments below
-----Original Message-----
From: dxlab@... [mailto:dxlab@...] On Behalf Of g4wjs
Sent: Friday, April 05, 2013 5:40 AM
To: dxlab@...
Subject: [dxlab] Re: SC split spot



--- In dxlab@..., "g4wjs" <bill.8@...> wrote:

Hi

just clicked a spot for VK9CZ on 28012.5 that had been splitting sensibly but when the spot:

2013-04-04 11:06 de YO6HSU (EU) : up 28.015,27 599

got added to the pile the split went to 28040.5.

Obviously the the mix of digit separators has confused SC but I believe it should have made a better stab at this one or ignored
it.

SpotCollector saw a spot on 28012.5 whose notes say "up 28.015", so it computed the QSX as 28012.5 +28.0 => 28040.5
I have extended the next version of SpotCollector to recognize the case where a value like 28.015 is more likely the QSX
frequency in megahertz, because it includes at least 3 decimal digits and specifies a frequency on the same megahertz band as the
transmit frequency.

Thus notes specifying "up 28.015" for a spot on 28012.5 would yield a QSX of 28015, but "up 28.1" for a spot on 28012.5 would
yield a QSX of 28040.6, and "up 28.015" for a spot on 21012.5 would yield a QSX of 21040.5.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ