Hi Joe, On 11/11/2015 23:45, Joe Taylor wrote: >> There is a further complication that occurs if both call signs are >> >compound ones, I believe the present implementation deals with that OK >> >but I'm not so sure using messages along the lines suggested in the User >> >Guide will work out as well without further work.. > This case is so rare that I haven't worried much about it. Squeezing > callsigns into 28 bits requires some compromises, to be sure. > Optimizing the protocol for EME meant not compromising its performance > (i.e., sensitivity) for 99% or the expected QSOs. I think I can change things without adding too much complexity such that we generate Tx1 as per the User Guide for cases where the message is sent to a type 1 compound c/s holder but use the current implementation when both calls are compound. For the later there is no other choice that works as I see it.
For Tx5 we could generate a "<base-call> <base-call> 73" standard message as per the User Guide except for the case where both calls are compound where the "<his-full-call> 73" is required as it is the only confirmation of the correct call being received possible. > > -- Joe ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
