[aprssig] APRS radios
Robert Bruninga bruninga at usna.eduTue May 27 20:40:57 UTC 2008
- Previous message: [aprssig] APRS radios
- Next message: [aprssig] APRS radios
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
>> Third party and Objects is where I think the spec >> overly complicated APRS. It was so simple. An object >> is NOT a special packet with its own formats. It is >> simply a position report of an object name that is >> not a callsign. So the name has to be in the packet, >> and not in the AX.25 header where the callsign is. >> >> On receipt, all one was supposed to do was chop off >> the header, and then use what remained (which now >> contains a NAME instead of a call) as if it had been >> received on RF directly. Just rearrange the name >>into a pseudo packet and then continue parsing like >> any other packet. > > Ok... what if the object has the '_' symbol? Do you > interpret the 000/000 extension as wind direction and > speed, as you would for a non-object packet? Yes, it would be parsed exactly like any other packet with that field. SO a WX packet can be transmitetd from a TNC with its own station call in th eheader, or a weather report can be transmitted as an object, with its name included in the data field. But everything after the LAT/LONG should be parsed identically, and handled the same. Though a reference to the transmitting station needs to be retained so we can trace ownership. > Or would it be course/speed, per the object report > format on page 68? According to that, wind isn't > one of the allowable extensions. Yep, this is a spec error. An object once the NAME has been extracted is supposed to be parsed like any other position report. > This is exactly the sort of inconsistency I'm talking about. > A formal grammar would specify exactly what can and can't go where. Yep, instead of taking my original design which was verbally presented as I have presented it above (an OBJECT should be parsed identically to any other position format). The Techincal author attempted then to do as you suggest, and that is re-specifiy every possible field in an Object. Which in my mind was not a good idea, as it could lead to omissions and confusion as noted above. Bob, WB4APR
- Previous message: [aprssig] APRS radios
- Next message: [aprssig] APRS radios
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the aprssig mailing list
