[aprssig] [APRS] Objects with 111111z timestamps

John Wiseman john.wiseman at cantab.net
Mon Dec 30 12:21:27 CST 2013

Hi Bob,

I'd always assumed your first view, and in a RF only world it makes perfect
sense. But with APRS-IS, creating globally unique object names requires a
degree of coordination that I don't think we are really capable of. The
second view, that say I could create a repeater object of 145.000 without
having to worry about someone on the other side of the world doing the same,
seems worthy of at least a bit of consideration. And it would get rid of the
objects that bounce around the map when names aren't unique.

Of course, tactical objects with a valid timestamp would remain updateable
by anyone, and be unique.

73, John

-----Original Message-----
From: APRS at yahoogroups.com [mailto:APRS at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Robert
Sent: 30 December 2013 17:40
To: APRS at yahoogroups.com
Cc: bruninga at usna.edu; aprssig at tapr.org
Subject: RE: [APRS] Objects with 111111z timestamps

Knee Jerk Opinion:

My opinion is that there is only one xxxxx named object (station) in the
system and it is replaced with the latest heard always.  The permanence of
111111z does not mean "permanence" as in not replaceable, but as in, it can
remain in the system as long as needed until replaced by anything else of
the same name.

2nd opinion:

But then I read my own writing in the second sentence and see that I
disagree with myself.  Not sure why I opined as such in the original
document.  Seems reasonable to me that anyone should be able to update a
same named  1111111 object in keeping with the intent of APRS to allow
anyone to provide new relevant data.  If others agree, I will REMOVE the
second sentence in the below document (though I have a nagging feeling it
was put in there after the fact for a specific purpose.).


*From:* APRS at yahoogroups.com [mailto:APRS at yahoogroups.com] *On Behalf Of
*Sent:* Monday, December 30, 2013 10:29 AM
*To:* APRS at yahoogroups.com
*Subject:* [APRS] Objects with 111111z timestamps

Hi folks,

I came across this in document http://www.aprs.org/info/object-perm.txt

"OBJECTS: use the unique 111111z timestamp to indicate permanence

The 111111z time stamp has always been recommended for all timeless

objects as a default to indicate to the viewer that this object time

stamp carries no temporal value.  Therefore, it was a reasonable

extension of this concept to declare that a 111111z object is permanent

and should not be overwritten by any other identically named object

UNLESS it is originated by the same transmitting station."

Although it does not explicitly state this, I read this as meaning if I
receive an object with the same name as an existing one, with a 111111z
timestamp but reported by a different station, I should keep both, and
display them both.

Is this a correct interpretation, and how to other software writers handle


John G8BPQ

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Yahoo Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    APRS-digest at yahoogroups.com 
    APRS-fullfeatured at yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    APRS-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo Groups is subject to:

More information about the aprssig mailing list