This is just what I have done and is easily doable another way. When I want to call CQ, I click the CQ button and Enable Transmit.
Take this example: I worked a prior station and I have the TX text fields filled thusly ( I hope the image comes through): When I want to change over and call CQ, I have always gone to Tab 2 and pressed the CQ button to load the Tx fields. Should I just be clicking on the Generate Std Messages on Tab 1 instead? Tom Schaefer, NY4I Blog: www.ny4i.com Madeira Beach, FL (Grid: EL87ot) > On Jul 29, 2020, at 9:55 AM, Roeland Jansen <[email protected]> > wrote: > > sudo remove tab2 .... > > On Wed, 29 Jul 2020, 09:36 Neil Zampella, <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > I have no problem with removing that for the next version. Would save a > lot of time by you and the other developers during contests answering > questions about why something was not logged properly. Tab 1 gives > the user a full visual display of what they are sending, and should be > receiving, which would eliminate other 'issues' about the way a QSO > progresses. > > > > Neil, KN3iLZ > > On 7/28/2020 10:28 AM, Joe Taylor wrote: > > Hi Andy, > > > >> Any valid call with a valid suffix will fail to generate a Tab 2 Grid > >> message. > >> > >> Clear DX Call and DX Grid fields > >> Select Message Tab 2 > >> Press Grid message button - generated message is blank. As expected. > >> Enter "CALL" in DX Call field and press Grid - generated message is > >> "<CALL> {my call} {my grid}". As expected. > >> Enter "CALL/7" in DX Call field and press grid - generated message is > >> "<CALL/7> {my call} {report}". Not as expected. > >> Select Message Tab 1 - Observe "<CALL/7> {my call} {my grid}" was > >> correctly generated. > > > > I can confirm the behavior you describe. > > > > Tab 2 was originally introduced as as aid to users of JT65-HF. It's > > more or less what those users were accustomed to. > > > > Tab 2 is currently deprecated, at least by your developers. We never > > use it, seldom test it, and generally wish it would go away. It does > > not fit comfortably into the many ways WSJT-X has evolved since the > > advent of FT8, FT4, and other things yet to come. > > > > Would there be huge howls of protest if Tab 2 were permanently > > removed? If so, should we pay attention to them? > > > > -- 73, Joe, K1JT > > > > > > -- > This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. > https://www.avg.com <https://www.avg.com/> > > > > _______________________________________________ > wsjt-devel mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel > <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel> > _______________________________________________ > wsjt-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
_______________________________________________ wsjt-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
