[aprssig] spaces in object names

[Steve Dimse]

On Aug 12, 2009, at 9:57 PM, Pete Loveall AE5PL Lists wrote:

> I do not understand why you don't give it a rest.  Most everyone is  
> in agreement that trailing spaces can safely be ignored (trimmed)

Hmmm, you were the one that said jfindu honored trailing spaces. At  
least I've convinced you of one way you were wrong!

> and most everyone except you have said that you should not alter the  
> internal content the Object name as defined as all between the first  
> character and the last non-space character in the field

Again, you have not bothered to read what I wrote. I agree that this  
is the least desirable choice (aside from your original position,  
which was that all spaces needed to be honored, including trailing  
spaces).

> (which may include multiple spaces).

So here is what we still have to argue. I say that, for the same  
reason trailing spaces should be ignored, only single consecutive  
spaces should be allowed. ("A B C" would be OK, but "A    B" would  
not.) The reason is that "A B", "A  B", "A   B", etc are too easily  
confused in tactical situations.

>  While some may not like the way they display or the possibility of  
> multiple spaces being mistyped, you now have evidence of multiple  
> software packages out there (and the Kenwood radios) which handle  
> multiple spaces just fine.

My argument has never been that it is not possible for hardware or  
software to handle multiple spaces. It is simple for me to implement  
what you now suggest, it takes the modification of a single character  
in a single regex.

My argument all along, the one you seem to be avoiding desperately,  
has been the problem lies in confusing users in tactical situations.  
Now that you have dropped your insistence on honoring trailing spaces,  
and I've accepted people want to include spaces, all we need to do is  
settle this issue of multiple consecutive spaces.

Please tell me your answer to this question:

APRS exists to provide real time tactical communications. Do you think  
allowing "A B", A   B", and "A     B" to be transmitted as three  
different objects improves APRS's utility in tactical communications?  
Worsens it? Has no effect?

Steve K4HG