Allow free-form RST in CW mode?

User avatar
KI5IO
Log4OM Alpha Team
Posts: 1798
Joined: 16 Aug 2015, 16:30
Location: Plano, TX

Re: Allow free-form RST in CW mode?

Post by KI5IO »

na7c wrote: 08 Mar 2023, 21:16 I just uploaded a single QSO with sent RST and received RST of 599GOOFY to eQSL and LoTW and both uploads were successful. If you would like proof, I can furnish it. Furthermore the latest ADIF specifications state that the RST fields are strings, and eQSL limits that string to 8 characters. I cannot find any restriction on LoTW's handling of RST fields.
Ted,

Tnx for your input and Terry has also provided you with an update to your questions.

I just wanted to share regarding RST and LOTW ... The TQSL routine that we all use to upload/download Q's to LOTW does NOT pass RST one way or another. It is ignored and thus not stored within the LOTW d/b that we all use for the related awards associated with ARRL/LOTW and many more. So from the LOTW / TQSL standpoint the RST values are a moot point.

I like the RST simply for my personal logging and have done so since 1970.

That being said, I've also modified my rst.xml file to better suit my needs/desires. Pls review Lele's post above where he mentions how each of us can use the Log4OM V2 Resource Editor to edit the rst.xml file as we desire.

The edited file is then named rst_user.xml and will take precedence over the rst.xml file. You can edit as needed and/or delete if desired and Log4OM V2 will then again use the default file.

All is very flexible this way. A very helpful approach so each OM can set things up in a customized way.

You can reach the Resource Editor at: Settings / Resource Editor The program resources you can edit are in the left panel and the edited resources are in the right panel.

Take a look and I think you will be pleased with all those options.
73 - Nolan Kienitz - KI5IO
Plano, TX
N1FG
Advanced Class
Posts: 89
Joined: 23 Jul 2021, 08:47

Re: Allow free-form RST in CW mode?

Post by N1FG »

Nolan I wonder if you could upload your rst_user.xml file? I would like to see which values made sense to you in your operating protocol.

Do you find yourself using the scroll window at all or simply typing in values that are in your list?

Thanks - Larry N1FG
User avatar
KI5IO
Log4OM Alpha Team
Posts: 1798
Joined: 16 Aug 2015, 16:30
Location: Plano, TX

Re: Allow free-form RST in CW mode?

Post by KI5IO »

N1FG wrote: 09 Mar 2023, 09:51 Nolan I wonder if you could upload your rst_user.xml file? I would like to see which values made sense to you in your operating protocol.

Do you find yourself using the scroll window at all or simply typing in values that are in your list?

Thanks - Larry N1FG
Larry,

I typically leave the RST values at the default settings for my day-to-day operating.

As for my "make sense" values for the sake of testing is and can be arbitrary. I will often just choose the values that I've used now and then when working hard to pull the QRP station out, working legacy/boat-anchor stations and other such similar Q's.

And, as we all know, the RST values that each of us choose for each Q is a personal option or opinion of what we are surmising as a good selection to describe or label that Q. Based upon the recommended RST values that you graciously provided links to above in this thread.

I've provided JPGs below of the current values I've added for the sake of testing (again) to demonstrate the edited RST.xml file and how it appears in the drop-down, etc..

In this case I've pretty much commented out all the RST values below 459 ... as noted for the sake of testing.

Again ... it is a personal operating choice. It would likely not be of much value (for my operating) to have RST values to choose from at 200 or below. I'm sure you could be critical of my statement of such, but that is simply "my" operating view.

That being said (as noted above) I pretty much leave the default values in place so those 200 and below values are available for my use should I choose to do so.

My personal opinion about RST values is that I feel it is a value that I have in "my" log for "my" logging history. And that is what I tend to focus on with respect to RST values.

FWIW - I do have accounts at many of the external services (HamQTH, Clublog, etc..) but only use them for testing. I do not maintain active updates/logs at those locations. The only service I do use with daily regularity is LOTW and that service does not accept nor utilize RST values. From that perspective RST values (for me) are a moot point.

As for operating once the callsign is in the Main UI field I will 'tab' to the S and R RST fields and enter in my chosen values via keyboard. Occasionally will use my mouse, but not often. There is a red highlight around field in the Main UI as I tab through the fields should I need to make changes during the QSO that is underway or just after and before I save it.

Hope this helps a tad.
Attachments
rst-recent.JPG
rst-recent.JPG (28.07 KiB) Viewed 1035 times
rst-edit.JPG
rst-edit.JPG (49.5 KiB) Viewed 1035 times
rst-txt-file.JPG
rst-txt-file.JPG (57.61 KiB) Viewed 1036 times
rst-main-UI.JPG
rst-main-UI.JPG (46.61 KiB) Viewed 1036 times
73 - Nolan Kienitz - KI5IO
Plano, TX
N1FG
Advanced Class
Posts: 89
Joined: 23 Jul 2021, 08:47

Re: Allow free-form RST in CW mode?

Post by N1FG »

Hi Nolan,

Thank you for your comments and explanation. I do understand the modifications that can be made in the rst_user.xml file and appreciate your demonstration of the effect.

However, for me the telling issue is that you generally use the default 599 as your sent RST value. I did a quick scan of the 7259 CW QSOs in my current SQL (MariaDB) log and this is a list (with frequency of occurrence) of the RST values which I have sent.

RST sent Values - CW 7259 contacts.jpg
RST sent Values - CW 7259 contacts.jpg (17.56 KiB) Viewed 1019 times
You can see a couple of things here - the first is I evidently had a typo for the value 531 (hihi) which should have been 539 I'm sure. The second thing is the range of values which I have used. (I rarely work DX or contests, so the overwhelming majority of these QSOs were other SKCC folks or conversational CW QSOs.)

Additionally, as I was generating this list it occurred to me that it's only half of the real issue - what if the station you are talking with sends you 349A? (If I was operating a boat-anchor they might send 348C - do I have to have a different rst_user.xml file if I'm operating older equipment to allow for the possible receive values?)

Here are the RST received values from those same 7259 CW contacts (by RST value).

RST rcvd Values - 7259 contacts.jpg
RST rcvd Values - 7259 contacts.jpg (19.74 KiB) Viewed 1019 times
For CW ops like me I think a dropdown list is a solution in search of a problem.

Thanks again for your comments and detailed explanation.

73 - Larry N1FG
User avatar
KI5IO
Log4OM Alpha Team
Posts: 1798
Joined: 16 Aug 2015, 16:30
Location: Plano, TX

Re: Allow free-form RST in CW mode?

Post by KI5IO »

Larry,

Certainly appreciate your reply and input and seeing as how your initial suggestion has been posted in this Feature Suggestion Area it is being taken into consideration (as are all suggestions). Often it takes time to gel the suggestions and see how changes may impact the overall operation/function of the APP.

Sometimes folks get impatient because things don't happen in the snap of finger time frame. First thing I note / caution OMs for is to be patient. Same thing goes for your "Allow free-form RST in CW mode?" Be patient and as you can tell we already have options within the current structure that satisfy your specific request, but just not exactly how "you" want it done. Again ... patience.

I see that you seem to be somewhat overly concerned about how I (and other Log4OM team members) operate/run my station with respect to if I do more contesting, DX or Rag Chews. I'm not sure what that is any of your concern to be quite honest. I've run my station since the early 1970s and I still consider myself a youngster in the world of amateur radio ... albeit 53 years of operating is not a bad run in my view.

Log4OM V2 is built to hopefully meet most of the needs for a wide swath of operators. There are many times that hiccups in the programming happen and/or requests come in asking for something new or changes to how elements are functioning. We do a reasonably good job of addressing everyone's input, but are far from perfect.

As for your query about the RST values for S and R ... Currently, should you edit your rst.xml file you will find that the changes you have made will appear in both the S and R dropdowns. You can add whatever you choose in that edited file and use as you see fit. Don't overthink your operating or you might be chipping away at the overall enjoyment you do have with your amateur radio operating. It is a hobby, not a job and we all do our very best to enjoy our hobby.

And before you ask (not that you do or should care) I've fortunately been retired for 8 years and am able to enjoy my amateur radio hobby much more. I'm very fortunate and thankful for that.

Bottom line ... your feature request is noted and on the table, but I will not offer any predictions. As I've said ... changes / enhancements can take time and internal testing.
73 - Nolan Kienitz - KI5IO
Plano, TX
N1FG
Advanced Class
Posts: 89
Joined: 23 Jul 2021, 08:47

Re: Allow free-form RST in CW mode?

Post by N1FG »

Nolan,

Just one comment as to contests and DX and why that is significant to this discussion. For both of those pursuits the RST is always (or at least 99.9% of the time) sent as 599. That's all I meant to reference as a difference to conversational CW where the RST is rarely 599 for most stations/locations/condx.


73 - Larry N1FG
User avatar
KI5IO
Log4OM Alpha Team
Posts: 1798
Joined: 16 Aug 2015, 16:30
Location: Plano, TX

Re: Allow free-form RST in CW mode?

Post by KI5IO »

N1FG wrote: 10 Mar 2023, 14:07 Nolan,

Just one comment as to contests and DX and why that is significant to this discussion. For both of those pursuits the RST is always (or at least 99.9% of the time) sent as 599. That's all I meant to reference as a difference to conversational CW where the RST is rarely 599 for most stations/locations/condx.


73 - Larry N1FG
Larry,

No further comment from me. I'll let you have the last word. ;)
73 - Nolan Kienitz - KI5IO
Plano, TX
User avatar
G4POP
Log4OM Alpha Team
Posts: 10752
Joined: 21 Jan 2013, 14:55
Location: Burnham on Crouch, Essex UK

Re: Allow free-form RST in CW mode?

Post by G4POP »

Clearly the changes made in the later Beta releases as a result of this complaint have gone un-noticed :D
73 Terry G4POP
Post Reply