[aprssig] FINAL note on the 1 foot precision debate
Robert Bruninga bruninga at usna.eduWed Jan 4 16:57:26 UTC 2006
- Previous message: [aprssig] The best resolution of position from APRS
- Next message: [aprssig] Where are the specs.?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Copy for those that have quit reading this diatribe.... and a few corrections... ************************************ Here is the bottom line on this debate. I have no more time for this refusal of XASTIR to move beyond the 1 foot precision problem. 1) XASTIR insists on sending the depricated obsolete compressed object /item format that has been known to not work on the thousands of Kenwoods for many years which reprsents 85% of our mobile APRS community that sees objects in their mobiles. This undermines the communications on-air integrity of APRS when mobiles cannot see these objects. 2) Yet there are 3 ways XASTIR could UPGRADE and transmit objects to 1 foot resolution if they wanted to instead of just bashing kenwoods, and using an old format known not to work. a) use KISS mode and send the object as a $GPGGA packet b) Send the object in 3rd party format as a $GPGGA packet c) IMplement the new APRS 1.1 !DAO! format. To me, This insistnce on using the obsolete/depricated compressed object/item format is what is holding back progress, missleading the community, and bashing a very useful product (Kenwoods) that almost half of us depend on for our APRS picture. If XASTIR would instead, use one of the existing formats or update to the APRS 1.2 spec proposal which does try to be responsive to user needs, then ALL users will be able to see what is on the air at a come-as-you-are event even if the sender is using XASTIR. de WB4APR, Bob
- Previous message: [aprssig] The best resolution of position from APRS
- Next message: [aprssig] Where are the specs.?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the aprssig mailing list
