[Logic] Identifying LoTW Contacts in LOGic ???
R Johnson
[email protected]
2003年9月12日 14:00:55 -0400
As far as LoTW goes you MUST have internet access. check the FAQ's on www.arrl.org/lotw.
73
Bob, K1VU
At 06:13 9/12/2003 , you wrote:
>They can't operate on the assumption that EVERYBODY has access to the
>internet... At least not yet...
>> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [email protected]
> > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Bill VanAlstyne
> > Sent: September 11, 2003 21:44
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: Re: [Logic] Identifying LoTW Contacts in LOGic ???
> >
> >
> > A newbie question about LoTW: Once ARRL activates LoTW, will
> > they still accept old-fashioned paper QSLs, or a combination
> > of paper QSLs and LoTW matches, for their awards? Or will
> > LoTW be mandatory? Maybe (based on the below) we don't know this yet?
> >
> > Bill / W5WVO
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Arthur Tan" <[email protected]>
> > To: "LOGic reflector" <[email protected]>
> > Sent: 11 September, 2003 5:51 PM
> > Subject: Re: Re: [Logic] Identifying LoTW Contacts in LOGic ???
> >
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > The ways I'm thinking about tracking LoTW contacts is to either (or
> > > both) put a unique identifier e.g. LOTW: in the comment field or
> > > create a True/False (type:logical) userfield called "LOTW" on the
> > > logform, and then modifying the AWARDS report to update
> > these fields.
> > > But as Jim says, we still have to wait until the league unveils how
> > > DXCC (WAS too?) award tracking will be accomplished. I've
> > heard that
> > > the ARRL is shooting for next Monday, September 15th as an official
> > > release date. We'll see what happens...
> > >
> > > 73, Art AB4RL
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >From Jim Brannigan <[email protected]> on Sep 05, 2003:
> > >
> > > > I agree.
> > >
> > > > But until the ARRL releases their proposals on award tracking we
> > > > will be in limbo. Will awards be automatically conferred or
> > > > incremented? How do we indicate submissions that are part
> > paper and
> > > > part LoTW? Will the ARRL maintain an "AWARDS progress"
> > file that is
> > > > viewable?
> > >
> > > > More questions, few answers.
> > >
> > > > Jim
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > I see no need of having separate S,R,& F designations for LoTW &
> > > > eQSL. I'm willing to accept the fact that having
> > submitted the SAME
> > > > ADIF file of my entire log to BOTH LoTW and eQSL that a
> > "Submitted
> > > > Flag" is unnecessary. The same goes for a "Received
> > Flag". So we're
> > > > left with just a "Fulfilled Flag" to indicate a match on
> > that QSO.
> > > > This should make programming a little easier.
> > >
> > > > My next thought (or nightmare) is having to enter each match
> > > > manually. I can see a real need for LoTW to export a list of
> > > > "Matching Contacts" and LOGic being able to read it and
> > update the
> > > > log status.
> > >
> > > > I seem to have more questions than answers.
> > >
> > > > Your thoughts Guys and Gals.
> > >
> > > > 73
> > > > Bob, K1VU
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > LOGic mailing list
> > > [email protected] http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/logic
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > LOGic mailing list
> > [email protected] http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/logic
> >
>>_______________________________________________
>LOGic mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/logic