[aprssig] Information organization

[Dana Myers]

On 2/17/2022 12:25 PM, Lynn W Deffenbaugh (Mr) wrote:
>
> But Pete is correct.  While your desire to do something is commendable, we really don't need N people rushing off to duplicate 
> effort in slightly different fashions and formats (I've seen at least FOUR formats proposed).

Where's the harm in N people writing their own version of an O'Reilly book on the APRS
protocol? Each of these is likely to expose useful information, ambiguities, areas to clarify
and confirmation of areas that are well-specified.

As long as no one claims to be replacing the APRS specification, I don't see the value in
discouraging such participation.

73,
Dana  K6JQ