[Moon] wsjt-cw

[Klaus DJ5HG]

Hello Gio, hello all,


let me comment your mail:

> Hi Graham, I agree with your considerations. 
> I would like to add that a verification is 
> possible also in JT65. If you decode a cq 
> with the help of deep search and you are in 
> doubt even if the decode probability is 
> labeled 10, a verification will follow. In 
> fact, at this point one answers with both 
> calls. If the decoded call is not correct, 
> the other station will continue with cq. 
> If she answers, this means his call is 
> correct. I suppose that also in a cw qso 
> a false decode can happen and I suppose 
> that the station calling cq will do something 
> similar until the code is correct. In a sked 
> the situation is the same. So, also in a JT65 
> qso all letters are copied, not the first time, 
> but cw rules do not say this.

JT65 is a fine mode as long as the RS or the KV-decoders 
are used. DS is based on a completely other interpretation. 
It does not use letters or symbols as JT65, it only knows 
some 1000 different messages and the corresponding 
physical signals. You could encode the same number of 
Chinese symbols into these signals, or you could use 
images or long texts like complete books, all stored 
on your HD. The DS decoder simply says which of the 
signals fits best and then displays on the screen 
what you have associated on your computer with the 
signal - a Chinese letter or an image or a complete 
book. What you really have received, only is the number 
of the signal, not the image or the book or the both 
calls displayed by JT65.

Unfortunately, the total number of signals used in DS 
is not sufficient to encode two arbitrary callsigns, 
it just can encode two characters. So the difficulty 
to receive the address information for the displayed 
message is the same as to receive two characters. 

> So we should clarify the rules of a digital qso, but 
> with different wording they will be applicable also 
> to cw, they will not be a separate set of rules.
> Thank you for the serene and civil words you employed 
> in explaining your opinion.
> 73, Gio IK1UWL

Yes ok Gio!


73,

Klaus