[Logic] List of Valid Values & Prefix Table & ARRL/RAC

Wed, 7 Jan 2004 07:17:44 -0500

I seem they just decided to "standardize" using the postal code... NT is
the proper postal abbreviation.... We had the same thing happen when we
changed from "PQ" to "QC" in Quebec.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] 
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Arthur Tan
> Sent: January 6, 2004 23:48
> To: LOGic
> Subject: Re: RE: Re: [Logic] List of Valid Values & Prefix 
> Table & ARRL/RAC
>>> Hi Brad,
>> From Bradford J. Williams - N8GLS:
>> > Nice to see your reply, been a while since I've "interacted" on the 
> > reflector.........Hope all is good and you got plenty of presents.
>> I'm doing okay. The best present these days would be more free time!
>> > I was thinking, and maybe not too clearly, that the contest logform 
> > was the answer. Still, without serious thinking, it seems 
> the answer 
> > lies in the fact that it IS just a multiplier issue. 
> Multipliers only 
> > count in contests, not awards. Having said that, and not 
> looking at a 
> > contest logform, the logform is "customizable" for multipliers, so 
> > can't it be a tad smarter ?? A new userfield ?? Maybe 
> combined with a 
> > "new" set of valid values titled RAC-NWT, RAC-NS, etc ?? 
> Not quite at 
> > the top of the priority list, but I'll be tinkering with this more.
>> I'm still not clear on the whole NT vs. NWT thing (again, due 
> to lack of time to sit down, read up, and sort it all out). 
> Has everything change to NT for contests while remaining NWT 
> for awards? Or has everything just changed to NT?
>> In either case, you can certainly create new "subsets" of 
> data values in list of valid values. Sure, have a field name 
> called "RAC" and have "NWT," "NS," etc. as individual values. 
> You could then modify whatever contest logform you need to 
> use RAC instead of VE PROV. In doing so, remember to change 
> the QSO points, multipliers, and if necessary, Cabrillo 
> panels. Basically, all I'm saying is that you can do it but 
> you have to remember to make a lot of changes in that logform.
>> Again, it would be so much simpler if the ARRL/RAC would just 
> settle on NT or NWT and not use one in certain situations. 
> (I guess I keep repeating that point, sorry.) Then we would 
> not have to go through the rigmarole of making new entries in 
> list of valid values and making the corresponding changes in 
> the logforms. We could just edit VE PROV in list of valid 
> values and be done with it.
>> Please let me know what you come up with as a final solution.
>> I wish you health, happiness, and more spare time for 2004 :)
>> 73, Art AB4RL
> _______________________________________________
> LOGic mailing list
> [email protected] http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/logic
>