Hi All, to anyone using the test version linked below. I would advise not using it on air as there is a flaw in my proposal.
The messages like: DE TI4/N0URE R-10 will not work because the report will not be collected at the far end :( I need to think about this further but it looks like there may be an insurmountable problem with identifying with a type 2 call near the beginning of a QSO when answering a CQ. Either we need to revert to just having the full call in the 73 message like: DE TI4/N0URE 73 and have: G4WJS N0URE EK70 as the reply to a CQ, or we have to reply to CQ calls with: DE TI4/N0URE EK70 which is problematic if you reply off frequency or the CQer is a bit slow off the mark as they will not get alerted since their call is not in the replying message. Anyone got any better ideas? I am going to improve the highlighting of own call messages and also ensure that if a full compound call is used anywhere in a QSO it will be correctly logged by WSJT-X. This will make having the full call only in the 73 message work better, but only if the QSO partner double clicks it which is not normal :( 73 Bill G4WJS. On 02/03/2015 02:25, Bill Somerville wrote: > Hi All, > > some time back the message generation was changed to help those with > type 2 compound call signs. Details are here: > > https://sourceforge.net/p/wsjt/mailman/message/32950792/ > > I am re-visiting this as John TI4/N0URE points out that there is no > generated message to send the first report in his case. > > I think the intention was to send the full type 2 compound call sign at > the first practical opportunity. When calling CQ the full call is > encoded along with the 73 message 5. This is fine but having message 2 as: > > DE TI4/N0URE EK70 > > doesn't seem to make sense since this is where the first report should > be sent, in fact as this is normally a transmission by initial caller, > they have already called CQ with their full compound call sign. So I > believe message 2 should be like: > > G4WJS N0URE -15 > > and message 3, which is the first opportunity for the replying station > to give their full compound call sign, should be like: > > DE TI4/N0URE R-05 > > Summarizing for a caller with a type 2 compound call sign: > > CQ TI4/N0URE EK70 > N0URE G4WJS IO91 > G4WJS N0URE -05 > N0URE G4WJS R-15 > G4WJS N0URE RRR > N0URE G4WJS 73 (Also see below) > DE TI4/N0URE 73 > > and for an answerer with a type 2 compound call sign: > > CQ G4WJS IO91 > N0URE G4WJS EK70 > N0URE G4WJS -15 > DE TI4/N0URE R-05 > N0URE G4WJS RRR > DE TI4/N0URE 73 > N0URE G4WJS 73 (Also see below) > > with both ends having type 2 compound call signs: > > CQ TI4/N0URE EK70 > N0URE W9XYZ FN75 > W9XYZ N0URE +05 > DE W9XYZ/VE1 R+02 > W9XYZ N0URE RRR > DE W9XYZ/VE1 73 > DE TI4/N0URE 73 > > Also related to this, it seems to me that when having a QSO with a > compound call sign station, type 1 and type 2 compound call signs should > be treated the same in generated messages and the only time the full > compound call sign need be used is in message 5 e.g. > > W9XYZ/VE1 73 > > or > > TI4/N0URE 73 > > thus confirming that you are aware you have worked a compound call sign > station. > > So a QSO might proceed as follows: > > CQ G4WJS IO91 > G4WJS W9XYZ FN75 > W9XYZ G4WJS -10 > DE W9XYZ/VE1 R-12 > W9XYZ G4WJS RRR > DE W9XYZ/VE1 73 > W9XYZ/VE1 73 > > or > > CQ W9XYZ/VE1 FN75 > W9XYZ G4WJS IO91 > G4WJS W9XYZ -12 > W9XYZ G4WJS R-10 > G4WJS W9XYZ RRR > W9XYZ/VE1 73 > DE W9XYZ/VE1 73 > > I also propose that the DX Call widget should not be overwritten with a > base call of a compound call sign e.g. if you double click on: > > CQ W9XYZ/VE1 FN74 > > and later in the QSO double click on: > > G4WJS W9XYZ -12 > > the DX Call shall remain as W9XYZ/VE1 so that message generation still > treats it as a compound call sign and logging saves the correct call sign. > > I also propose that a very basic check on the call sign extracted when > double clicking a decoded message be applied to validate if it is a call > sign and not DX or TU or 73 or FRED or RRR or ... > > The check will be that the call sign must contain at least one letter > and one number next to each other. Not perfect but will not suffer false > positives and will catch almost all misinterpretations of the second > word in free text messages. > > Here is an implementation of what I propose: > > https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/4192709/wsjtx-1.4.0-rc3-win32-r4996-genmsg.exe > > I would appreciate comments and testing please. Mac and Linux versions > on request. > > 73 > Bill > G4WJS. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored > by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all > things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to > news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the > conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/ > _______________________________________________ > wsjt-devel mailing list > wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/ _______________________________________________ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
