Tony,
No, eQSL does not count for the ARRL (it does count for a few
organizations... but let's not go off into those weeds. What matters to me
is ARRL and it does not recognize eQSL today.) However, some time within the
next year or two some form of electronic QSO verification will be accepted
by the ARRL. IF and/or WHEN eQSL will be one of the accepted verifications
is a subject for an off-line, non-DX4WIN argument.
My point is that _I_ would like DX4WIN to support multiple forms of QSO
verification - not just the boolean "Do you have it? Yes or No" of today. If
this is a feature that we {collectively} want to see in a future version of
the software, we need to plant that seed now because of the long turn-around
times in software development -- we may not see it in the product for
another 12 - 18 months.
-larry
K8UT
----- Original Message -----
From: "N2TK" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Larry Gauthier'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <dx4win@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2002 11:27 AM
Subject: RE: [Dx4win] Next version of DX4WIN - tracking QSLs and e-QSLs?
> Larry, will your present eQSL's count? ARRL is moving towards it, but I
> thought it wasn't here yet?
> Tony
> N2TK
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Behalf Of Larry Gauthier
> Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2002 09:10
> To: dx4win@mailman.qth.net
> Subject: [Dx4win] Next version of DX4WIN - tracking QSLs and e-QSLs?
>
> I don't know about everybody else, but with the ARRL move toward
sanctioning
> Internet-based QSLing, I have begun using eQSL. It works OK, it is fast,
but
> it is not as exciting as opening envelopes from the mailman. I still
enjoy -
> and can't imagine ever abandoning - the traditional practice of sending
and
> collecting "real" QSL cards.
>
> The problem is that DX4WIN regards a QSL as a boolean [Yes/No] event - you
> either have a confirming QSL, or you do not. With the arrival of e-QSL's,
I
> will want to track more than one receipt per QSO: When did I send/receive
an
> eQSL? When did I send/receive a physical QSL? And, of course, there would
> need to be reports that differentiate, for example "e"-DXCC versus
> "classic"-DXCC.
>
> Is anyone tracking those two mechanisms in DX4WIN today? How?
>
> -larry
> K8UT
>
> --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
> multipart/alternative
> text/plain (text body -- kept)
> text/html
> The reason this message is shown is because the post was in HTML
> or had an attachment. Attachments are not allowed.
> Please post in Plain-Text only.---
> _______________________________________________
> Dx4win mailing list
> Dx4win@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/dx4win
>
>
