In a message dated 10/10/07 5:50:41 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> What's wrong with doing it that way? There must be something wrong with it, > > because nobody in the ham world is doing it. Would most hams not like such a > > manual scheme? I sure would. > In my work, things like standard plans, timetables and rule books are often done that way. When you have a big book that is frequently revised, and is in the hands of many people, it makes sense, because the cost of sending everyone a complete new book is much more than the cost of keeping page-by-page revision info. The big downside is that there must be absolute discipline in keeping the books up to-date. An old timetable can be worse than none at all. But in the amateur radio market, the revisions are few and the numbers small. Keeping track of updates is a lot of administrative work. It seems to me that having the manuals and revisions on the website is the best way to go. That way, anyone can see them. 73 de Jim, N2EY ************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [email protected] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
