[aprssig] The best resolution of position from APRS

[AE5PL Lists]

Ok, I can't let this pile of manure that Bob has dished out sit. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Bruninga
> Posted At: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 7:29 PM
> Subject: RE: [aprssig] The best resolution of position from APRS
> 
> Yes, the APRS spec as updated by the APRS1.1 addendum.  
> I try very hard to keep the spec current and compatible.

A specification is no longer a standard to be written to but a document
that has items "deprecated" and "obsoleted" because one company fails to
implement it all.  Righttttt...  Let's see, we should get rid of
telemetry, item, raw weather, and capabilities packets, right?  And the
messaging decay algorithm?  How about anything not properly implemented
in UI-View?  Seriously, I don't think even you can bring Roger back from
the dead to change that code (may he rest in peace).

> No, but since about 2002  when the problem with the 
> compressed objects began to surface, we continuously reminded 
> everone not to use them.  I have been asking XASTIR not to 
> use them since that time.  And this was included in the very 
> first addendum that came out after that time. 

Why is this addendum not on the TAPR site?  Could it be because not all
of the APRS-WG signed off on it?  Could it be because you want to try to
wrest control of the APRS spec back from them because _you_ don't like
having to work with other people? ;-)

> Because we want all existing 5000 users of the only APRS 
> manufactured radio to still see APRS on their radio.

And they (we) do!  But all your puffing up about how compressed objects
will "obsolete the Kenwood" is just that, a bunch of puff.  This entire
thread would be funny if there weren't so many out there that wrongly
believe that your posts are equivalent to "The APRS Gospel According to
Bob".  Why couldn't you just leave well enough alone and let your
"final" post on the matter be just that?  Oh yeah, because you never let
anyone else have the final word.

> No one said maintainng backwards compatibility was easy.  It 
> takes work and committment.  No one liked the NTSC color 
> standard either, but they all realized that it was best for 
> everyone to have both NEW color while letting the B/W TV's to 
> still see the picture.
> 
> That is what we are tyring to do with APRS.

Ok, so APRS will be obsolete and unusable without a converter box by
2009, right?  Because that is what your analog TVs will be.  If that is
what you are trying to do with APRS, then why are you so against someone
implementing the entire specification, not just a portion or some
addendum you came up with? :-)

Flame on...  I am going to spend my time doing something useful like
watching the Rose Bowl.

73,

Pete Loveall AE5PL
mailto:pete at ae5pl.net