[PaQSO] Logging Software Thoughts

[Ron Notarius WN3VAW]

Hi Mike,

In view of your update post, I wanted to make a few comments about logging software.  I’m also posting this to the reflector so that anyone else who may want to comment can do so – besides, if I’m wrong on something (happens all the time) I want to know about it and correct it before I make a bigger schmuck out of myself.

Regarding Cabrillo:  I don’t think that most people are aware that Cabrillo is really more of a set of standards than a single, rigid format.  If you ever look at Cabrillo formatted logs from different contests, you’ll see that the output can be slightly different for each one.

In essence, Cabrillo format lets you define your comment and summary information fields (that would solve a big problem in regards to missing summary sheets), and what order the data (ie QSO information) is placed.  Reading the data itself is easy, as its all pure ASCII text.  Those who remember a COBOL data line (where you had to line up certain data to start at a certain position on a text line) will be very familiar with the concept.

The Cabrillo specs include formats pre-designed for certain major contests, and for some state QSO parties (offhand, I think the FL & CA ones are included, and I think the New England & Mid-Atlantic ones too) so finding a Cabrillo format that fits the Pa QSO Party might not be that difficult.  If you choose to go that way.

One disadvantage to Cabrillo formats is that the submitted log won’t have any scoring information included.  Remember that Cabrillo was originally designed for the ARRL to help automate contest log checking for their contests, and as part of the process, they automatically rescore submitted logs anyway.  

A second alternative would be to go with the “other” standard format:  ADIF.  ADIF was designed to be, well, just what the letters stand for:  Amateur Data Interchange Format.  ADIF files are also pure ASCII text, but the design of the file is that each piece of information is preceded by a definition of what that information is, and how big it is (for example, <FREQ:4> 7255 to indicate your transmit frequency was 7255 – this is off the top of my head, so the exact syntax no doubt differs).  This creates a large file, but in many ways it’s a little easier to work with, since you don’t have to guess as to what information goes where (especially if you don’t know the Cabrillo template used). 

I don’t recall offhand if ADIF lets you store the summary information as part of the file, as Cabrillo can.  I’ll try and check on that at home tonight.

Now one of the reasons that ADIF and Cabrillo are so attractive to many of us software logging users is that they are both close to universal.  Most logging programs can read and/or write either or both formats, or 3rd party converters are available.  That’s certainly not the case with many other programs.  And even formats from popular contest programs, like the .BIN file generated from CT, are not always universally accepted.  I’d think that you’d want to keep conversion headaches to a minimum on your end.

Having said all this:  Ultimately, the decision comes down to you, John, and the rest of the NARC Board of Directors.  You need to tell us how you want the file.  If you want the data converted to a Excel or Lotus style spreadsheet, or an Access of dBase style database, or whatever – you tell us.  It then falls to us to make our electronic logs match your needs.  I know that may cause some kicking and screaming from the user base (imagine that), but ultimately that’s the way it has to be.

IMHO, either Cabrillo (with a QSO party template) or ADIF make the most sense.  But then, what the heck do I know, anyway?

73, ron w3wn
Coordinator, N3SH Bonus Station, 2006 Pa QSO Party

(what, after 30+ years, I can't get a 1x2?)