Moderated WAC Award
|
John Morphet
Currently the Worked All Continents award requires paper QSL cards to qualify for the award. What would it take for the IARU to recognize QSLs confirmed by LoTW. LoTW is probably more secure than paper QSLs, anyway.
John, WØZI |
|
|
|
WA8RZR - Jan Blair <wa8rzr@...>
From: ARRL-Awards@... <ARRL-Awards@...> on behalf of John Morphet <jmorphet@...>
Sent: Friday, October 25, 2019 8:57:06 AM To: ARRL-Awards@... <ARRL-Awards@...> Subject: [ARRL-Awards] WAC Award Currently the
Worked All Continents award requires paper QSL cards to qualify for the award. What would it take for the IARU to recognize QSLs confirmed by LoTW. LoTW is probably more secure than paper QSLs, anyway.
John, WØZI |
|
|
|
Hello John et al,
Yes, absolutely, it makes sense to have WAC added as an award that one can apply for via LoTW. In fact, it and a few other awards are on the to-do list. Also on the horizon is a refresh for LoTW, up to a 2.0 level. Both are very much in active review on this end. More updates will follow as we have news to report on either. Keep the suggestions coming! 73,
Bart Jahnke, W9JJ ARRL - Radiosport and Field Services Manager |
|
|
|
WA8RZR - Jan Blair <wa8rzr@...>
From: ARRL-Awards@... <ARRL-Awards@...> on behalf of Bart Jahnke <w9jj@...>
Sent: Friday, October 25, 2019 12:39:51 PM To: ARRL-Awards@... <ARRL-Awards@...> Subject: Re: [ARRL-Awards] WAC Award Hello John et al,
Yes, absolutely, it makes sense to have WAC added as an award that one can apply for via LoTW. In fact, it and a few other awards are on the to-do list. Also on the horizon is a refresh for LoTW, up to a 2.0 level. Both are very much in active review on this end. More updates will follow as we have news to report on either. Keep the suggestions coming! 73,
Bart Jahnke, W9JJ ARRL - Radiosport and Field Services Manager |
|
|
|
Gary Hinson <Gary@...>
OK, how about providing an LoTW API or function that lets [authorized] awards managers submit lists of entrants’ QSOs for validation?
If this was available, potentially any award could start accepting LoTW confirmations … and LoTW would suddenly become even more popular.
Contest logs might also be validated in the same way, although the volume of checks could be problematic unless they were rate-limited (e.g. by charging for each QSO submitted?) and/or the validation function was slick as a well-oiled Teflon coated pan.
73 Gary ZL2iFB
From: ARRL-Awards@... <ARRL-Awards@...> On Behalf Of Bart Jahnke
Hello John et al, 73,
Bart Jahnke, W9JJ ARRL - Radiosport and Field Services Manager |
|
|
|
Hi Gary,
Thanks for the suggestion.
Something we can add to the list for review when developing LoTW 2.0.
73 Bart Jahnke, W9JJ ARRL - Radiosport and Field Services Manager
From: ARRL-Awards@... <ARRL-Awards@...>
On Behalf Of Gary Hinson
Sent: Friday, October 25, 2019 2:03 PM To: ARRL-Awards@... Subject: Re: [ARRL-Awards] WAC Award
OK, how about providing an LoTW API or function that lets [authorized] awards managers submit lists of entrants’ QSOs for validation?
If this was available, potentially any award could start accepting LoTW confirmations … and LoTW would suddenly become even more popular.
Contest logs might also be validated in the same way, although the volume of checks could be problematic unless they were rate-limited (e.g. by charging for each QSO submitted?) and/or the validation function was slick as a well-oiled Teflon coated pan.
73 Gary ZL2iFB
From:
ARRL-Awards@... <ARRL-Awards@...>
On Behalf Of Bart Jahnke
Hello John et al, 73,
Bart Jahnke, W9JJ ARRL - Radiosport and Field Services Manager |
|
|
|
Dave AA6YQ
+ AA6YQ comments below
OK, how about providing an LoTW API or function that lets [authorized] awards managers submit lists of entrants’ QSOs for validation?
If this was available, potentially any award could start accepting LoTW confirmations … and LoTW would suddenly become even more popular.
Contest logs might also be validated in the same way, although the volume of checks could be problematic unless they were rate-limited (e.g. by charging for each QSO submitted?) and/or the validation function was slick as a well-oiled Teflon coated pan.
+ The ability to enable an ARRL-authorized award sponsor or contest sponsor to submit an ADIF file containing QSO records and receive an ADIF file indicating whether or not each submitted QSO is confirmed via LoTW was suggested years ago, and was prototyped by ARRL staff. To my knowledge, no subsequent progress was made, but I don’t know whether the status is the result of a policy issue (“Should we allow this? How much should we charge?”) or a development/documentation resource issue.
+ I would love to see a mechanism like this fully developed/documented and released, as I believe it would greatly extend the use of LoTW by organizations from small local radio clubs running weekend sprints to large national organizations offering awards to hams worldwide. As a side effect, more ops would participate in LoTW, to everyone’s benefit.
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
From: ARRL-Awards@... <ARRL-Awards@...> On Behalf Of Bart Jahnke
Hello John et al, 73,
Bart Jahnke, W9JJ ARRL - Radiosport and Field Services Manager |
|
|
|
Dave AA6YQ
+ AA6YQ comments below 73, Dave, AA6YQ
|
|
|
|
This would never work without more hardware and that would mean more cost and that would mean these people would have to be charged. That would be reasonable. The problem is deciding what would be a fair charge. Doing it without upgrades would not be fair to current users because of the risk of overloading the system.
Outlook Laptop Gil W0MN Hierro Candente Batir de Repente 44.08226N 92.51265 W en34rb
From: ARRL-Awards@... <ARRL-Awards@...> On Behalf Of Bart Jahnke
Sent: Friday, October 25, 2019 13:08 To: ARRL-Awards@... Subject: Re: [ARRL-Awards] WAC Award
Hi Gary,
Thanks for the suggestion.
Something we can add to the list for review when developing LoTW 2.0.
73 Bart Jahnke, W9JJ ARRL - Radiosport and Field Services Manager
From: ARRL-Awards@... <ARRL-Awards@...> On Behalf Of Gary Hinson
OK, how about providing an LoTW API or function that lets [authorized] awards managers submit lists of entrants’ QSOs for validation?
If this was available, potentially any award could start accepting LoTW confirmations … and LoTW would suddenly become even more popular.
Contest logs might also be validated in the same way, although the volume of checks could be problematic unless they were rate-limited (e.g. by charging for each QSO submitted?) and/or the validation function was slick as a well-oiled Teflon coated pan.
73 Gary ZL2iFB
From: ARRL-Awards@... <ARRL-Awards@...> On Behalf Of Bart Jahnke
Hello John et al, 73,
Bart Jahnke, W9JJ ARRL - Radiosport and Field Services Manager |
|
|
|
Dave AA6YQ
+ AA6YQ comments below On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 12:31 PM, Gilbert Baron wrote:
This would never work without more hardware + I'm not aware of any evidence that the hardware currently hosting LoTW is anywhere close to running out of steam. WAZ support was added two years ago without any noticeable adverse impact. + Of course adding new functionality and new users can't go on forever without adding capacity, but with major post-contest submission surges being processed within a couple of hours, I suspect there's capacity for another popular award or two. 73, |
|
|
|
You may be right. I have no inside information about the system. It does seem there have been times that people have complained about response but it may have been for other reasons. I was not talking about an award or two. I was responding to the request for a general unlimited award process with am open API.
In any case the real problem is more likely to be development and test resources. 😊
Outlook Laptop Gil W0MN Hierro Candente Batir de Repente 44.08226N 92.51265 W en34rb
From: ARRL-Awards@... <ARRL-Awards@...> On Behalf Of Dave AA6YQ
+ AA6YQ comments below On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 12:31 PM, Gilbert Baron wrote:
+ I'm not aware of any evidence that the hardware currently hosting LoTW is anywhere close to running out of steam. WAZ support was added two years ago without any noticeable adverse impact. + Of course adding new functionality and new users can't go on forever without adding capacity, but with major post-contest submission surges being processed within a couple of hours, I suspect there's capacity for another popular award or two. 73, |
|
|
|
Dave AA6YQ
+ AA6YQ comments below
You may be right. I have no inside information about the system. It does seem there have been times that people have complained about response but it may have been for other reasons. I was not talking about an award or two. I was responding to the request for a general unlimited award process with am open API.
+ Processing files submitted by award/contest sponsors could be paced to avoid degrading interactive performance and new QSO ingestion.
In any case the real problem is more likely to be development and test resources.
+ Agreed. And don’t forget documentation!
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
|
|
|
|
Gary Hinson <Gary@...>
+ Agreed. And don’t forget documentation!
…. Including the functional specification: what is it meant to achieve (and avoid), ideally in sufficient detail to design, code and test it?
Plus a business case to cost-justify the investment – maybe comparing options including do-nothing.
If something was already coded, I guess some of that at least has been done already. So how come it didn’t make it to production? Is anything salveagable/reusable from the original initiative I wonder?
73 Gary ZL2iFB |
|
|
|
Dave AA6YQ
* more AA6YQ comments below
+ Agreed. And don’t forget documentation! …. Including the functional specification: what is it meant to achieve (and avoid), ideally in sufficient detail to design, code and test it? Plus a business case to cost-justify the investment – maybe comparing options including do-nothing. * Without a product manager in place, there can be no credible revenue projection. I spent years advocating the hiring of an LoTW product manager. Lots of nodding heads, but no action. If something was already coded, I guess some of that at least has been done already. So how come it didn’t make it to production? Is anything salveagable/reusable from the original initiative I wonder? * Knowing the developer, I suspect that the prototype could be deployed tomorrow to a friendly award/contest sponsor or two-- but a successful first iteration would require documentation, training material, and someone capable of providing user support. Taking these steps would only be sensible if there was a commitment to productization if the initial iterations proved successful. * The prototype was developed as WAZ support was wrapping up - just before all LoTW development resources were re-assigned to what were deemed higher-priority projects. Whether resource unavailability was the only impediment to moving forward with the prototype, I can't say, as I resigned from the ARRL's LoTW Committee at that time. 73, Dave, AA6YQ |
|
|
|
John Morphet
The API sounds like a potentially long term solution. Is there a simpler solution to using LoTW for the WAC award?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
John, WØZI -----Original Message-----
From: ARRL-Awards@... <ARRL-Awards@...> On Behalf Of Dave AA6YQ Sent: Friday, October 25, 2019 11:01 PM To: ARRL-Awards@... Subject: Re: [ARRL-Awards] WAC Award * more AA6YQ comments below + Agreed. And don’t forget documentation! …. Including the functional specification: what is it meant to achieve (and avoid), ideally in sufficient detail to design, code and test it? Plus a business case to cost-justify the investment – maybe comparing options including do-nothing. * Without a product manager in place, there can be no credible revenue projection. I spent years advocating the hiring of an LoTW product manager. Lots of nodding heads, but no action. If something was already coded, I guess some of that at least has been done already. So how come it didn’t make it to production? Is anything salveagable/reusable from the original initiative I wonder? * Knowing the developer, I suspect that the prototype could be deployed tomorrow to a friendly award/contest sponsor or two-- but a successful first iteration would require documentation, training material, and someone capable of providing user support. Taking these steps would only be sensible if there was a commitment to productization if the initial iterations proved successful. * The prototype was developed as WAZ support was wrapping up - just before all LoTW development resources were re-assigned to what were deemed higher-priority projects. Whether resource unavailability was the only impediment to moving forward with the prototype, I can't say, as I resigned from the ARRL's LoTW Committee at that time. 73, Dave, AA6YQ |
|
|
|
I administer the Worked All California
Counties award for the Northern Cal Contest Club. It's a tad less
than "prestigious" but I'd gladly cough up a nominal annual sum
for the ability to submit a list of QSO's from an applicant and
get QSL info back. We also accept QSO's in the Cal QSO Party if
the other stations have submitted logs. An XML interface [like
QRZ.com] would be great.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
73, Fred ["Skip"] K6DGW Sparks NV DM09dn Washoe County On 10/25/2019 1:32 PM, Dave AA6YQ
wrote:
|
|
|
|
Alan Sorum WL7CG <asorum@...>
All, LOTW support for the WACC Award would be great. I thought it would be easy a few years ago to get all the California counties. Wrong. 73 Alan WL7CG On 10/25/19 2:13 PM, Skip wrote:
I administer the Worked All California Counties award for the Northern Cal Contest Club. It's a tad less than "prestigious" but I'd gladly cough up a nominal annual sum for the ability to submit a list of QSO's from an applicant and get QSL info back. We also accept QSO's in the Cal QSO Party if the other stations have submitted logs. An XML interface [like QRZ.com] would be great. |
|
|