[aprssig] Re : Re : NWS ON rf

[rttyman]

>>
> Well, this is one leader that is completely opposed. Tactical  
> callsigns have always been a part of APRS. The fact you lose a  
> character of tactical call length and make the tactical callsign much
> less readable (exactly the opposite of the reason for tactical  
> callsigns in the first place) is enough for me to vigorously oppose  
> the proposal.

Well, Steve, if your worry that one "lose" charset will be make tactical
call less redable, why not to use Objects instead?

With Objects (as by APRS specification) we can put up to 9 (nine) chars -
will be much better displayes on map and no problem to compartablity with
first zero in source ID! As Object can begin from ";" sign and up to 9
chars of any data in label.

>  Add the fact that just for Citizen Weather alone you are
> talking about cooridinating the efforts of dozens of programmers, and
> throwing chaos into an operation system relied upon by thousands of  
> people, and your proposal the proposal appears terribly self-centered.

Huh, add one zero before they IDs looks big problem? Think no.
On other hand its can be just on-fly transformed by APRS-IS software, if
developer will write small script for it - few minutes work, but will
be solution w/o problems!



73,
Sergej