Re: [wsjt-devel] Request: WSJT-X UDP protocol extension to identify decodes to will accept UDP reply command.

[Laurie V. <vk3...@gm...>]

On 15/06/2016 8:16 AM, Bill Somerville wrote:
> Hi Laurie,
>
> I'm not sure I understand yet why JTAlert has to be so certain about
> double-click responses, WSJT-X isn't.
Bill,

Because without the certainty that a Decode is "UDP Reply capable", 
JTAlert has no reliable way of highlighting that a Callsign is 
double-clickable. If JTAlert highlights a Callsign as double-clickable 
to the end user, there is an expectation that WSJT-X will respond to 
that double-click. That doesn't currently happen. As a result, the 
end-user is left with the impression that JTAlert is broken (with a 
resulting increase in support emails I receive), when it is not broken, 
just that WSJT-X will not accept the Reply Command for that particular 
decode. To try and avoid this situation, my intention is to only provide 
a "Double-clickable indication" to the end user when the decode is 
*known* to accept the Reply Command.

JTAlert needs to know programmatically that a particular decode will 
accept the UDP Reply Command.

Trying to educate the end-user that not all CQ decodes will accept the 
double-click and that they need to only use the JTAlert double-click on 
certain decodes is not practical. Thus my desire to only indicate 
decodes that will accept the double-click and get the end-user into the 
habit, that "this type of visual indication" will correctly setup 
WSJT-X, rather then the "try it and see if it works" as currently exists.

I'm not sure how I can explain this any differently.

Bottom-Line.... JTAlert needs to be able to determine if a decode 
accepts the UDP Reply Command *BEFORE the command is sent*, not after it 
is sent and WSJT-X is observed to have not responded. Thus my request 
for a Boolean flag in the UDP Decode packet.

de Laurie VK3AMA