Other SOTA sites: SOTAwatch | SOTA Home | Database | Video | Photos | Shop | Mapping | FAQs | Facebook | Contact SOTA

Web site summit error report (Botley Hill *still*


#1

This is the 4th time I’ve tried to report an error in summit data on the website. I’ve tried email to various SOTA official addresses and messages on the reflector. Despite people agreeing that it’s wrong it still hasn’t been corrected.

Botley Hill G/SE-005 moved location several months ago.

The association manual has the updated OS map reference and this has been copied over to the website summit entry.

BUT, the Lat/Long coordinates have not been updated on the Summit Information page, nor has the Google Map link which uses the Lat/Long, so the green arrow is in the wrong place.

Perhaps more importantly the move puts the summit in a different locator square and that hasn’t been updated either (it’s now IO91xg) which means that people are reporting the wrong (big) square!

Can someone please fix this.

It also begs the question of how many other pages are wrong because of incorrectly applied updates.

Colin - G8TMV


#2

In reply to G8TMV:

Perhaps more importantly the move puts the summit in a different
locator square and that hasn’t been updated either (it’s now IO91xg)
which means that people are reporting the wrong (big) square!

Is it really such a big deal? Your locator depends on where you operate from and I’m guessing that locations valid for SOTA could lie in either locator square.

73

Richard
G3CWI


#3

In reply to G3CWI:

Is it really such a big deal?

For SOTA, no. But how many of us rely on the data on the website when doing an activation? It’s possible that someone could give out the wrong locator and invalidate a QSO where the chaser needed that precise square for a contest.

Colin


#4

In reply to G8TMV:

Dealing with errata is of course quite important, Colin, but we cannot just drop other work to put it right. When you see how many new Associations appear over the next few weeks you will understand why action has been slower than you wish. You should also bear in mind that SOTA is being run by people that have other responsibilities: work committments, families and homes, even (perish the thought!) the desire to use their rigs occasionally!

Your correction is in the pipeline.

73

Brian G8ADD


#5

In reply to G8ADD:

I’m with Colin on this one !

If the information about the change of location was available months ago when the formal change of location was announced then this should have filtered into the database in a matter of days, not weeks or months later.

Stewart G0LGS


#6

In reply to G0LGS:

…this should have filtered into the database…

Stewart - the Database is correct, as is the ARM. The G association manager processed those updates as soon as he was in post.

Tom M1EYP


#7

Tom,

As You well know ‘Database’ in this context refers to the datastore behind the SotaWatch site - not the one behind the sotadata site.

Stewart G0LGS


#8

In reply to G8ADD:

Dealing with errata is of course quite important, Colin, but we cannot
just drop other work to put it right. When you see how many new
Associations appear over the next few weeks you will understand why
action has been slower than you wish.

This is wrong as all IT people will tell you, the priority must be to keep the live system accurate and up to date. New systems should be done by a different set of “development” people as and when resources are available and not at the expense of live system maint.

You should also bear in mind
that SOTA is being run by people that have other responsibilities:
work committments, families and homes, even (perish the thought!) the
desire to use their rigs occasionally!

I understand this. Apart from being an IT professional I’m also a Debian Developer, we totally understand the need for a “Real Life” ™.

Your correction is in the pipeline.

Thankyou.

Colin G8TMV


#9

In reply to G8TMV:

I understand what you are saying, Colin, and it rather looks like part of the update job fell into the cracks under our current high pressure of work - having accepted deadlines we have to try to honour them - but it will be worth it as you will soon see! As for a “different set of development people”, wow! it makes it sound like we need a multistory office block to house SOTA Inc, whereas we just have several guys spread around the UK quietly beavering away in our spare time and getting together to compare notes and hammer out policy once a year. Still, on the whole, I don’t think we have done too badly and a little human error will creep in from time to time even in the biggest organisations…

73

Brian G8ADD


#10

In reply to G0LGS:
Sorry to add another error report. Nine Barrow Down (G/SC-013, NGR SZ008811 - the correct reference, I was there on 15th Sept) is shown as NGR SX007811 on the summit info page. OS Get-a-map puts this on the coast path at Port Gaverne, just down the coast from Tintagel.

Regards, Dave, G6DTN


#11

In reply to M0DFA:

I emailed somebody (shuffles nervously through back-catalogue of emails and discovers that it was Peter, G3TJE) with a message starting “Don’t know if you’re the right person to notify, but I am confident you will know who is if it isn’t you” reporting this error almost exactly three months ago.

Since Peter didn’t respond to my email, I still don’t know whether he is, or was at the time, the right person. I don’t even know whether my email got eaten by a spam filter en route.


#12

In reply to G6ENU:

I emailed somebody (shuffles nervously through back-catalogue of emails and
discovers that it was Peter, G3TJE) with a message starting “Don’t know if
you’re the right person to notify, but I am confident you will know who is if
it isn’t you” reporting this error almost exactly three months ago.

For your info (and probably many other people too):

At the bottom of the window you type stuff in when posting on here is some text which says amongst other things…

“Please be aware that the management team may not always be monitoring the reflector, nor are they often able to respond quickly to issues raise. So in addition to any comments made on the reflector, communications requiring a response from the Management Team should be made directly to The Management Team. Likewise, discussion about the development of this facility and the website is welcome on the reflector, however, please also contact the webmaster direct if you need a response from him, especially in the case of reporting bugs, etc.”

In the text “The Management Team” is a link which takes you to the contact page on the SOTA website. There you can fill in the form and it gets sent by email to all the MT.

I’m saying this because the text is displayed time after time when people use SOTAwatch. The problem being because it’s always being shown, nobody reads it, and most of the time, the most important bit is positioned off the bottom of the screen! Unless you scroll the window you won’t see it.

Andy
MM0FMF


#13

In reply to G6ENU:

Thanks, guys. It looks like finger trouble at some point!

In the first instance, information of this type should go to the AM, in this case Jimmy, M3EYP, who has the responsibility of keeping the G summit list up to date and on the straight and narrow. He checks the information and sends corrections forward so that they can go into the database. So if you find an error anywhere, then you look up the relevant Association Manager and send details to him. This is covered in the General Rules section 3.12.2. In the rare case that the post of AM is vacant then the duties of the AM have reverted to the MT pending appointment of a new AM and you contact the MT.

73

Brian G8ADD


#14

Hi All,

The grid reference for Botley Hill G/SE-005 is correct in the G ARM, SOTA database, SOTAwatch and the SOTA website. The latitude and longitude coordinates and locator for Botley Hill G/SE-005 need updating on SOTAwatch and the SOTA website and these coordinates will be updated when SOTAwatch and the SOTA website has its next summit update. The grid reference for Nine Barrow Down G/SC-013 is correct in the G ARM and I updated the grid reference for this summit in the SOTA database at the end August this year. The grid reference for Nine Barrow Down G/SC-013 needs to be updated on SOTAwatch and the SOTA website and these coordinates will be updated when SOTAwatch and the SOTA website has its next summit update.

Jimmy M3EYP
G-Association Manager


#15

In reply to M3EYP:

these coordinates will be updated when SOTAwatch and the
SOTA website has its next summit update.

How often are summit updates done? Is it a regular scheduled update or are they done on a requested/needed basis?

Colin


#16

In reply to MM0FMF:
Thank you, Andy, for pointing out what we should do to bring errors to the attention of the MT. I accept that members of the MT, along with the rest of us, have plenty else to do besides working at computers and that corrections will have to take their place in the ‘To Do’ list. However, unless a means is employed to promulgate the information back onto (for instance) the reflector, only the originator and the responsible person in the MT will know of the problem. Not a lot of help to an activator in an un-familiar area.

In reply to M3EYP: Thank you for your reply, Jimmy. As an only partially reformed computer Luddite I am now puzzled as to why an error only appears in certain areas. My simple mind would have thought that there would have been only one source of the information, accessed by all the programmes that needed that data.

Regards, Dave, G6DTN


#17

In reply to M0DFA:

Hi Dave,

The single source of information is the SOTA Database. This is correct and up-to-date as far as England is concerned and has been for considerable time. (I am currently working furiously on a huge number of new associations and association updates, getting all that data into the Database).

A manually triggered update is necessary to bring SOTAwatch and the static website up to speed. This has been scheduled and automated in the past, but not at present for several reasons. It is hoped it will be a daily (nightly?) scheduled task again in the future.

Please bear with us while we complete all the update and new association work mentioned above, and moreover, while Gary G0HJQ hands over the Database Manager role to Andy MM0FMF. Due to the size and complexity of the SOTA Database, this will need to be a careful and detailed handover process, with significant training implications. Remember that Andy and Gary are both volunteers, and the amount of time and effort they have both committed to ensuring the continuing smooth operation of the facility, is highly commendable in my opinion.

In the meantime, in the case of any dispute, the ARM is always considered to be the definitive document. In the case of England G, the SOTA Database is absolutely correct and up-to-date, and matches the ARM. (This is also the case for the vast majority of other associations as well, the exceptions being those currently being updated as mentioned above).

Tom M1EYP


#18

In reply to M1EYP:

OK - that explains why I didn’t see it. AFAICR my email about it was before I ever made my first posting on here, and while I was still finding my way around the information sources.


#19

Details for Botley Hill should be correct in all sources now.

Tom M1EYP


#20

Hi All,

I don’t know if this is accurate or not, but I’m sure the locator for Botley Hill G/SE-005 is now IO91XG, not JO01AG due to its different location.

Jimmy M3EYP