[Dxbase] Many, many more Dxbase LoTW import-related dupes found

Wed Jun 16 11:57:48 EDT 2004

Bill,
I've been watching your many posts to the DXbase Reflector about your LoTW
saga. I hope that you are directing all of these data integrity issues to
the LoTW folks since none of the issues you speak about are DXbase problems.
They all involve invalid data coming from the LoTW data source. In fact,
it's only because DXbase incorporates a rigorous set of validations that
these issues are being detected and allowing you the opportunity to realize
that LoTW is injecting errors into some of your QSO database.
1. Invalid IOTA formats.
2. Invalid Mode designations.
3. Canadian provinces in the US State field.
4. Invalid grid designators.
5. Invalid zone information.
We, along with the makers of several other logging software products, voiced
our strong concern to the LoTW development team long ago that it was
critical for them to apply the ADIF standards and to implement some data
integrity checks. It's pretty obvious that our concerns have not been
addressed in the current deployment of the LoTW process. As time goes by,
data integrity problems will no doubt have a detrimental impact on the
entire LoTW effort for the ARRL since they are ultimately going to have to
face the fact that the LoTW database is full of erroneous data. The LoTW
process may well be the most secure and tamper proof system ever known to
mankind, but if the data it protects is prone to error....
We do not mind folks using the DXbase Reflector to make others aware of LoTW
data integrity issues originated by LoTW, but please be careful that you do
not imply that these are deficiencies in DXbase because they are not. Maybe
there ought to be a reflector for LoTW where folks can go and voice their
issues to whomever is representing the LoTW system to the public. We have
lots of prospective customers review the DXbase Reflector archives and we
don't want them to walk away with a feeling that these are DXbase issues
when they are LoTW database problems.
I would be very interested to know what the LoTW folks have told you about
these issues and what their plan is for addressing them.
Thanks,
Jack
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "William H. Hein" <Bill at NT1Y.com>
To: "DXbase Reflector" <dxbase at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2004 9:47 AM
Subject: [Dxbase] Many, many more Dxbase LoTW import-related dupes found
As I scan thru my log book, I am finding lots of these (dupe QSOs created
during a LoTW import procedure), all seemingly from the 1995 CQ WW 160m SSB
contest, where I made a big effort (over 1000 QSOs). Just noticed that the
original loggings all have the exact frequency noted (note frequency, not
band which is 160 in both cases) and the mode as LSB. The dupe QSOs, and
there are at least a few dozen of them, don't have the frequency field
filled in and are all listed as USB.
Perhaps this LSB vs. USB thing is the key? The imported QSOs are all noted
as USB, which is of course wrong. And LoTW does not distinguish between USB
and LSB, listing all SSB QSOs as simply SSB (is this an ADIF standard?).
73,
Bill NT1Y
_______________________________________________
Dxbase mailing list
Dxbase at mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/dxbase