Everyone has their own perspective on this problem. Here's mine:
Every contest sponsor considers itself in control of the acceptable
file format for logs submitted for its contests. This is a perfectly
reasonable attitude on their part because they are (with the possible
exception of the ARRL staff) all volunteers and are free to put
constraints that will minimize their pain when checking logs. But this
status quo leads to a VERY large number of variations of file formats
that are required of a logging program.
Some folks want a separate file per band. Others want all the bands
in one file, but sorted by band. Most are sorted chronologically.
Some want page breaks ("40 QSOs per page") so they can run the file
to a DOS printer. Others intend to read them by computer. Now consider
all the detail about what it means to submit a multi-multi or a
multi-2 log, etc. etc. etc. The summary sheet is situation is even
worse because just about no sponsor describes what constitutes one.
I understand the ARRL is working on something. The ARRL also has a
uniform file specification for all the contests they sponsor.
I considered reading source code to count the number of file formatting
routines I have written over the years. But I figure it would take
me an hour or so just to find them all and this email isn't worth
that. But the number is around 20 or so.
One of the implications of this thread has been "why don't those
software authors get their act together and make it easy to submit
a log electronically?" I suggest an alternative implication: "why
don't those contest sponsors all get together and decide how they
want to receive a log electronically?"
Imagine what your life would be like if every bank in the world
individually specified what position your signature, the amount, etc.
belonged on a check? and there were no standardization of paper
sizes, etc?
Let me suggest a direction for a solution. There is a data interchange
format being quickly adopted in the world wide web called XML. Its
purpose is to solve exactly the problem faced by hams and contest
sponsors: a standard mechanism for exchanging structured data. It
is NOT a Bill Gates-only product or even a PC-only product but rather
has wide support in the industry. XML by itself doesn't fully solve
the problem we face. A structured definition of what constitutes an
electonic log would still have to be agreed upon/standardized by
software vendors and sponsors alike. The closest thing the ham
community has to this today is ADIF, as suggested by someone on
this thread already. But since ADIF really doesn't currently meet the
requirements, the advantages of an XML based solution (built-in
internet support from web browsers, lots of other software tools
for generating/parsing available for free, etc.) would outweigh
the advantage of ADIFs head start today. But no matter what the
technical details, the solution must be arrived at by a rather
large number of parties: all contest sponsors and all software
vendors.
Unfortanately, all I can offer at this point is the suggestion.
I have a life outside ham radio and don't have the time/energy
to devote to the standardization process. Experience in a much
smaller venue tells me the process is long and can be painful.
In the absence of such standardization, I will continue to add
file formatting routines to my software as complaints arrive about
missing info in log files, formats wider than will fit on "my" printer,
having too few or too many <CR><LF>, too much difficulty for the
submitter to figure out which menu entry to click for contest XYZ, etc.
etc. etc. My suspicion is that other software vendors will behave
as I do because they are faced with the same variations.
Wayne, W5XD
w5xd@alum.mit.edu
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|