[aprssig] Re: The best resolution of position from APRS
Robert Bruninga bruninga at usna.eduThu Jan 5 00:48:28 UTC 2006
- Previous message: [aprssig] Re: The best resolution of position from APRS
- Next message: [aprssig] Re: The best resolution of position from APRS
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
>>> mckeehan at mckeehan.homeip.net 01/04/06 12:48 PM >>> >Should Items be removed from the spec because >the Kenwoods don't support them? Yes. The purpose of the spec is to promote inteoperability between users and to insure on-air compatibilty. Like any standard, when there are obsolete formats, or things with the original spec that are causing problems or are prventing on-air compatibilty and preventing interoperability, then most standards organizations will depricate and obsolete the offending specific format. >How are Compressed Objects any different? They arent. That is what APRS has done to the compressed object/item format to keep the standard current and up-to-date with the state-of the art of its users. and to insure on the air compatibiility. Further the APRS spec has a proposal for a different way to provide not only 1 foot resolution but also the datum required to use that added precision (the !DAO! format). SO the APRS spec IS keeping up with the needs of the community. de Wb4APR, Bob On Wed, January 4, 2006 12:27 pm, Robert Bruninga said: > Why does not XASTIR simply fix the problem rather than > insisting that Kenwood fix it?
- Previous message: [aprssig] Re: The best resolution of position from APRS
- Next message: [aprssig] Re: The best resolution of position from APRS
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the aprssig mailing list
