Search found 311 matches
- 15 Nov 2015, 13:34
- Forum: User Support
- Topic: Prefix bug
- Replies: 10
- Views: 6516
Re: Prefix bug
Who uses the shortened ARRL prefix for awards? Log4OM? The DXCC is normally used for any DX awards that I'm aware of (not that I'm aware of everything but prefixes seem like an awfully hard way to do a DX awards when the DXCC code is much more tightly controlled). And not following the ADIF standard...
- 14 Nov 2015, 14:19
- Forum: User Support
- Topic: Prefix bug
- Replies: 10
- Views: 6516
Re: Prefix bug
I also see that LOTW corrects the prefix to WPX for the WPX award. When I download the LOTW ADIF they are corrected as in this example: ARRL Logbook of the World Status Report Generated at 2015-11-14 13:52:43 for w9mdb Query: QSL ONLY: YES QSL SINCE: 2015-11-13 00:00:00 <PROGRAMID:4>LoTW <APP_LoTW_L...
- 14 Nov 2015, 13:49
- Forum: User Support
- Topic: Prefix bug
- Replies: 10
- Views: 6516
Re: Prefix bug
But the ADIF spec wants WPX -- not that ARRL list.
http://www.adif.org/303/adif303.htm
http://www.cq-amateur-radio.com/cq_awar ... _rules.pdf
http://www.adif.org/303/adif303.htm
http://www.cq-amateur-radio.com/cq_awar ... _rules.pdf
- 14 Nov 2015, 13:12
- Forum: User Support
- Topic: Prefix bug
- Replies: 10
- Views: 6516
Re: Prefix bug
Any reason not to use the one the the add request?
- 14 Nov 2015, 06:09
- Forum: User Support
- Topic: Prefix bug
- Replies: 10
- Views: 6516
Prefix bug
JTAlert 2.6.20 sending QSO to Log4Om 1.23.0 Prefix registers as "W" instead of "WA3" as this example shows...screen shot of QSO and the entry from the Communicator log. Screenshot 2015-11-14 00.02.59.png 2015-11-13 22:38:58.7199 INFO: #=qje$IehhV$W0BRu75i71jzRmw54m0HOJiWfXS_mtIrt...
- 23 Aug 2014, 12:38
- Forum: Error Reports
- Topic: JT9 Mode select
- Replies: 2
- Views: 3087
JT9 Mode select
Small bug....in the QSO Info JT9 is not in alphanumeric order in the Mode select.
It shows up before JT4 instead of after JT6M
It shows up before JT4 instead of after JT6M
- 17 Jul 2014, 20:35
- Forum: User Support
- Topic: LOTW QSL Mgmt
- Replies: 11
- Views: 7309
Re: LOTW QSL Mgmt
Isn't that the whole idea of the software remembering? I'm a bit pedantic and download every day (I run JT65 a lot and can keep my radio running while I work so I have QSO's every day). Waiting for a longer download is just a few extra seconds I'd like to avoid. And I'm all for consistency between t...
- 17 Jul 2014, 14:45
- Forum: User Support
- Topic: LOTW QSL Mgmt
- Replies: 11
- Views: 7309
Re: LOTW QSL Mgmt
I think my bug report got buried in the other comments. Looking at this again the EQSL download has a "Download QSO from latest check" while the LOTW Download does not. Is there some logical reason for that or could/should that same latest check be added to LOTW. I'm always changing the da...
- 14 Jul 2014, 13:54
- Forum: User Support
- Topic: LOTW QSL Mgmt
- Replies: 11
- Views: 7309
Re: LOTW QSL Mgmt
As for K7RP's comment about received date I know the received date in the LOTW ADI file is the date that LOTW received it....not the date you download it. I wrote my own LOTW utility so I'm familiar with the format. I can understand just wanting to see the important LOTW new entries which my utility...
- 14 Jul 2014, 12:36
- Forum: User Support
- Topic: LOTW QSL Mgmt
- Replies: 11
- Views: 7309
Re: LOTW QSL Mgmt
Sorry for not being specific enough.
I'm taking about the download. I always have to change the date for LOTW to get only the most recent (since my last download).
The ESQL download remembers the last one.
I'm taking about the download. I always have to change the date for LOTW to get only the most recent (since my last download).
The ESQL download remembers the last one.