[aprssig] APRS SPEC Addendum 1.2 Proposals

Shawn Stoddard stoddard at pobox.com
Mon Mar 14 18:40:43 EDT 2016

Agreed. We use them to lead teams to locations to address issues. 

> On Mar 14, 2016, at 17:27, Curt Mills via aprssig <aprssig at tapr.org> wrote:
> Regarding this web page:
>   http://www.aprs.org/aprs12.html
> It says this in the top section:
> "Formats no longer recommended: Compressed-Objects, ITEM Format, Raw Weather Formats,"
> I'd like to put in my thumbs-up for both Compressed Objects, and both Compressed and Non-compressed Items.
> We've implemented these in Xastir and I find them of use in SAR. Compressed format gives much better precision in placing and/or recovering objects, precision you cannot get with non-compressed APRS formats. Items are useful for placing positions when you have no timestamp, as well as providing a shorter packet than APRS Object format.
> In short, I see no advantage to removing formats that are currently used to good effect and already implemented in APRS programs.
> -- 
> Curt, WE7U
> http://wetnet.net/~we7u
> http://www.sarguydigital.com
> _______________________________________________
> aprssig mailing list
> aprssig at tapr.org
> http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.tapr.org/pipermail/aprssig_lists.tapr.org/attachments/20160314/b0e0f1b8/attachment.html>

More information about the aprssig mailing list