Cabrillo V2.0 FAQ -- Jan 31, 2000 --------------------------------- 1 Philosophical Questions of Broad Scope 1.1 What is Cabrillo? 1.2 What was wrong with the old ARRL format? 1.3 But, Cabrillo is so, uh, primitive... 1.4 Why not use an existing format, such as ADIF or something XML-based? 1.5 Why are the ARRL and CQ backing Cabrillo? 2 Philosophical Questions of Narrow Scope 2.1 There is no QSO or multiplier data in the summary sheet part of Cabrillo. Why not? 2.2 There is no way to assign point values to QSOs in Cabrillo. Why not? 2.3 There is no way to indicate new multipliers as worked in Cabrillo. Why not? 2.4 There is no way to indicate duplicate QSOs in Cabrillo. Why not? 2.5 I'm a logging program author. Because the Cabrillo format doesn't provide for indicating duplicate QSOs, new multipliers as worked and various other vestiges of the paper log era, should I create my own special set of extensions to Cabrillo and implement them in my logging program? 3 Practical Questions for Contest Participants 3.1 How does Cabrillo affect me as a contest participant? 3.2 Does this mean I will have to learn a new logging program? 3.3 Can I send the file via email as an attachment? 3.4 What should I name the file? 3.5 Do I also need to submit a summary sheet? 3.6 Do I also need to submit a dupe sheet? 3.7 Do I also need to submit a list of multipliers worked? 3.8 Because the Cabrillo format doesn't provide for marking duplicate QSOs, indicating new multipliers as worked, and various other things that used to be used with paper log sheets, should I modify the Cabrillo file with a text editor to include this information? 3.9 I don't own a computer and I log the old fashioned way with pencil and paper. I guess I can't participate in contests anymore, eh? 3.10 My logging program doesn't support the Cabrillo format. If I submit an electronic log in some other format, will I be disqualified? 3.11 What logging programs support Cabrillo? 3.12 Are people submitting Cabrillo logs already? 4 Philosphical Questions for Contest Participants 4.1 There are lots of other software authors out there. Why didn't you include them in the Cabrillo dialogue? 4.2 Why didn't Cabrillo go through a period of public commentary as with an FCC NPRM or an Internet RFC? ---------- 1 Philosophical Questions of Broad Scope 1.1 What is Cabrillo? Cabrillo is an interface between logging program authors and contest sponsors. It is a simple and practical modification to the ARRL electronic log format, intended to simplify the automation of log collecting and reporting of contest results. 1.2 What was wrong with the old ARRL format? There was nothing wrong with the old ARRL format per se. However, after ten years of experience receiving electronic logs it was observed that a few improvements could be made, in particular making it a little less open-ended and including summary sheet information. Cabrillo was designed to incorporate these improvements while at the same time not introducing any *new* problems that didn't already exist in the old ARRL format. 1.3 But, Cabrillo is so, uh, primitive... Cabrillo is intended to be a low-tech sort of "least common denominator" format, both easy to generate and easy to read. Different contest administrators use different tools to read the logs, so a format which is both fixed column and space delimited was found to be the least disruptive to present log-checking procedures. 1.4 Why not use an existing format, such as ADIF or something XML-based? Firstly, because the contest sponsors would need an ADIF or XML parser to process the logs (and currently 0% of the sponsors of contests that accept Cabrillo logs have that capability) and secondly because the contest participants would need a logging program that is capable of generating an ADIF or XML file (approximately 20% of HF contest logs received at the ARRL are written by programs with that capability, and about 2% of VHF contest logs). Furthermore, 100% of Cabrillo contest sponsors have the capability of reading primitive one-QSO-per-line column-oriented file such as Cabrillo, and 98% of the electronic logs received are written by programs capable of generating such a format. Clearly there is room for a clever, all-inclusive, high-tech, state-of-the art ADIF- or XML-based contest log exchange protocol in the future. Cabrillo V2.0 is not this protocol. 1.5 Why are the ARRL and CQ backing Cabrillo? Because the ARRL and CQ hope that eventually all computer generated logs will be submitted in a common format so that they can be processed with a greater degree of automation, leading to more accurate and timely publication of the final results. 2 Philosophical Questions of Narrow Scope 2.1 There is no QSO or multiplier data in the summary sheet part of Cabrillo. Why not? The QSO and multiplier data will be computed automatically as part of the log checking procedure. 2.2 There is no way to assign point values to QSOs in Cabrillo. Why not? The point value of each QSO will be computed automatically as part of the log checking procedure. 2.3 There is no way to indicate new multipliers as worked in Cabrillo. Why not? The multiplier count will be computed automatically as part of the log checking procedure. 2.4 There is no way to indicate duplicate QSOs in Cabrillo. Why not? Duplicate QSOs will be assigned a value of zero points automatically as part of the log checking procedure. 2.5 I'm a logging program author. Because the Cabrillo format doesn't provide for indicating duplicate QSOs, new multipliers as worked and various other vestiges of the paper log era, should I create my own special set of extensions to Cabrillo and implement them in my logging program? No. The Cabrillo specification includes all the information the contest sponsor needs. Generating files that are not Cabrillo-compliant undermines the automation process, thus causing extra work and greater potential for human error on the part of contest sponsors. 3 Practical Questions for Contest Participants 3.1 How does Cabrillo affect me as a contest participant? Very little. After the contest is over, use your logging program's post-contest procedure to generate a log in the Cabrillo format, then follow the contest sponsor's instructions for emailing or sending a floppy via postal mail. Since the log and summary information is integrated into a single file, you only need to submit one file to the contest sponsor. 3.2 Does this mean I will have to learn a new logging program? No, Cabrillo is simply a file that your logging program will create for electronic submission to the contest sponsor. Your logging program will still print summary sheets, logs sheets, dupe sheets, rate sheets, and so forth for your personal use -- same as always. 3.3 Can I send the file via email as an attachment? You can send the file as an attachment or as inline text within the body of your message. The ARRL prefers to receive the file as an email attachment. 3.4 What should I name the file? Experience indicates that a filename like CALLSIGN.LOG (where CALLSIGN is the call sign used during the contest) is the most effective name for the contest sponsors. 3.5 Do I also need to submit a summary sheet? No, all the summary sheet information needed by the contest sponsors is included within the Cabrillo file. 3.6 Do I also need to submit a dupe sheet? No, all the dupe sheet data needed by the contest sponsors is included within the Cabrillo file. 3.7 Do I also need to submit a list of multipliers worked? No, all the multiplier data needed by the contest sponsors is included within the Cabrillo file. 3.8 Because the Cabrillo format doesn't provide for marking duplicate QSOs, indicating new multipliers as worked, and various other things that used to be used with paper log sheets, should I modify the Cabrillo file with a text editor to include this information? No. The Cabrillo file includes all the information the contest sponsor needs. Submitting files that are not Cabrillo-compliant undermines the automation process, thus causing extra work and greater potential for human error on the part of contest sponsors. 3.9 I don't own a computer and I log the old fashioned way with pencil and paper. I guess I can't participate in contests anymore, eh? I know of no plans by the ARRL, CQ, or NCJ to stop accepting paper logs. Please get on, operate the contest just as you always have, have a good time, enjoy the magic of wireless, and submit your paper log when you are done to show your support of the contest. Contest sponsors have very few metrics at their disposal to determine whether a contest is a success or not; total logs submitted is one of them. 3.10 My logging program doesn't support the Cabrillo format. If I submit an electronic log in some other format, will I be disqualified? No, your log will not be disqualified if it submitted in some other format. Please keep in mind that a log submitted in a format other than Cabrillo requires quite of a bit of human intervention by the contest sponsors. Beginning November 1, 2000, the ARRL will reserve the option to re-classify electronic logs that are non-Cabrillo-compliant as checklogs. A log will be considered Cabrillo-compliant if all summary and QSO data is encoded in the submitted file per the Cabrillo specification. CQ has made no such annoucement. Please consult the specific contest rule annoucements for further details. 3.11 What logging programs support Cabrillo? CT by K1EA, NA by K8CC, RTTY by WF1B, SuperDuper by EI5DI, TRlog by N6TR, Writelog by W5XD, and many others promised to add Cabrillo support by Autumn of 2000. Only upon the receiving the support of these software authors did the ARRL and CQ adopt Cabrillo as a standard. 3.12 Are people submitting Cabrillo logs already? Yes, 40% of the electronic logs received at HQ for the 1999 ARRL November Sweepstakes SSB were in Cabrillo format. 4 Philosphical Questions for Contest Participants 4.1 There are lots of other software authors out there. Why didn't you include them in the Cabrillo dialogue? Many software authors were included, and there was no attempt to exclude any logging program authors from participating in the dialogue. However, the packages authored by these six individuals above account for over 80% of the electronic logs received by the ARRL. 4.2 Why didn't Cabrillo go through a period of public commentary as with an FCC NPRM or an Internet RFC? Cabrillo is an interface between logging program authors and contest sponsors, so the dialogue was limited to logging program authors and contest sponsors.