Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Matching prefixes

Expand Messages
  • Ford Peterson
    I have been using Logger 16 bit for my station log since time began. I need to upgrade it and am evaluating alternatives. I m stuck in the if it ain t
    Message 1 of 10 , Oct 1, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      I have been using Logger 16 bit for my station log since time began. I need to upgrade it and am evaluating alternatives. I'm stuck in the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" mode. But I have a question about prefixes

      The K7C operation, when entered, comes up at a 7 call. So, I make the entry KH7/K7C and life is good--the log's reports are accurate. But, if I upload this to LOTW, I don't think it will match will it? I am betting I've got a pretty good percentage of my log (28,000 QSOs, about 50% of which are DX) that has fallen prey to my behavior when logging.

      Anybody got ideas as to the 'fix?' Is there a way to identify issues with my LOTW data that will allow me to correct the situation by pointing me to the QSOs in question?

      Ford-N0FP
      ford@...
    • Dave Bernstein
      KH7/K7C will definitely not match the entry uploaded by K7C. The better way to handle this situation is to modify your logging application s DXCC database to
      Message 2 of 10 , Oct 1, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        KH7/K7C will definitely not match the entry uploaded by K7C.

        The better way to handle this situation is to modify your logging
        application's DXCC database to stipulate that K7C is on Kure Island.

        Given the increasing occurence of non-standard or ambiguous
        prefixes, an "entity override" capability is handy. This lets users
        temporarily specify a callsign and its DXCC entity without mucking
        with the DXCC database; when the operation terminates, one simply
        deletes the override. This should apply to DX spots as well as to
        logged QSOs.

        As far as I know, LotW won't help you identify unmatchable QSOs; if
        you upload a QSO whose callsign is KH7/K7C, it will just sit in LotW
        and never generate a QSL. Some logging applications can show you all
        uploaded-but-not-yet-matched QSOs. If you always used the "slash"
        approach, filtering your log to display only QSOs whose callsigns
        contain a slash, have been uploaded to LotW, but have not been
        matched would significantly reduce the number of QSOs to be manually
        scanned.

        Correction will also be manual, although some logging applications
        will let you correct multiple QSOs with one set of actions. If
        you've logged KH7/K7C on 5 bands, for example, you would be able to
        select them all, and then change all of their callsigns to K7C with
        one action.

        73,

        Dave, AA6YQ


        --- In ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com, "Ford Peterson" <n0fp@a...> wrote:
        > I have been using Logger 16 bit for my station log since time
        began. I need to upgrade it and am evaluating alternatives. I'm
        stuck in the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" mode. But I have a
        question about prefixes
        >
        > The K7C operation, when entered, comes up at a 7 call. So, I make
        the entry KH7/K7C and life is good--the log's reports are accurate.
        But, if I upload this to LOTW, I don't think it will match will it?
        I am betting I've got a pretty good percentage of my log (28,000
        QSOs, about 50% of which are DX) that has fallen prey to my behavior
        when logging.
        >
        > Anybody got ideas as to the 'fix?' Is there a way to identify
        issues with my LOTW data that will allow me to correct the situation
        by pointing me to the QSOs in question?
        >
        > Ford-N0FP
        > ford@c...
      • Ford Peterson
        Dave wrote: ... Dave, Thanks for the input. I can sort out my log in terms of / but many calls are likely accurate that contain a / . For example, a
        Message 3 of 10 , Oct 1, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Dave wrote:

          ...snip...

          > As far as I know, LotW won't help you identify unmatchable QSOs; if
          > you upload a QSO whose callsign is KH7/K7C, it will just sit in LotW
          > and never generate a QSL. Some logging applications can show you all
          > uploaded-but-not-yet-matched QSOs. If you always used the "slash"
          > approach, filtering your log to display only QSOs whose callsigns
          > contain a slash, have been uploaded to LotW, but have not been
          > matched would significantly reduce the number of QSOs to be manually
          > scanned.
          >
          > Correction will also be manual, although some logging applications
          > will let you correct multiple QSOs with one set of actions. If
          > you've logged KH7/K7C on 5 bands, for example, you would be able to
          > select them all, and then change all of their callsigns to K7C with
          > one action.
          >
          > 73,
          >
          > Dave, AA6YQ

          Dave,

          Thanks for the input. I can sort out my log in terms of "/" but many calls are likely accurate that contain a "/". For example, a friend of mine works contests at different locations. As many contesters know, signing KH7/K7C is far more effective than K7C/KH7. The accurate way to sign your call from KH7 would be AA6YQ/KH7. Yet this has almost universally become KH7/AA6YQ. The reason is, during a DX contest, running a frequency and signing AA6YQ/KH7 would result in far fewer QSOs than the other way around. Why? Because the listener is spinning the dial before you get to the "Q" much less the "/".

          So how do you enter this situation in light of the fact that the DX may likely submit his call the right way, yet you would submit your call the way it was sent on the air? The way it should be? or the way that it is likely to be? (e.g. K7C)

          Does DXLAB support the "upload but no match" feature? Or is there another software package?

          Ford-N0FP
          ford@...
        • K0HB
          My logger (HyperLog) allows me to manually over-ride the calculated entity. Perhaps yours has a similar capability. In the end it probably doesn t matter
          Message 4 of 10 , Oct 1, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            My logger (HyperLog) allows me to manually over-ride the "calculated"
            entity. Perhaps yours has a similar capability.

            In the end it probably doesn't matter anyhow, as LoTW will credit you with
            the entity the that K7C's certificate stipulates.

            73, de Hans, K0HB
            --
            http://www.home.earthlink.net/~k0hb


            > [Original Message]
            > From: Ford Peterson <n0fp@...>
            > To: <ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com>
            > Date: 10/1/2005 5:25:17 PM
            > Subject: [ARRL-LOTW] Matching prefixes
            >
            > I have been using Logger 16 bit for my station log since time began. I
            need to upgrade it and am evaluating alternatives. I'm stuck in the "if it
            ain't broke, don't fix it" mode. But I have a question about prefixes
            >
            > The K7C operation, when entered, comes up at a 7 call. So, I make the
            entry KH7/K7C and life is good--the log's reports are accurate. But, if I
            upload this to LOTW, I don't think it will match will it? I am betting
            I've got a pretty good percentage of my log (28,000 QSOs, about 50% of
            which are DX) that has fallen prey to my behavior when logging.
            >
            > Anybody got ideas as to the 'fix?' Is there a way to identify issues
            with my LOTW data that will allow me to correct the situation by pointing
            me to the QSOs in question?
            >
            > Ford-N0FP
            > ford@...
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
          • Dave Bernstein
            Yes, I realize that not every one of the slash-containing callsigns you logged was a prefix workaround ; I was just suggesting a way to cut down on the number
            Message 5 of 10 , Oct 1, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              Yes, I realize that not every one of the slash-containing callsigns
              you logged was a "prefix workaround"; I was just suggesting a way to
              cut down on the number of log entries you'd need to manually review.
              Any callsign that doesn't contain a slash can't have been a prefix
              workaround.

              My strong suggestion is that you log (and upload) the callsign given
              over the air. If you work me as FJ/AA6YQ, you should assume that
              I'll upload my logs with the operator set to FJ/AA6YQ. If I upload
              them with the operator set to AA6YQ/FJ, there will be no matches in
              LotW, and that will have been my fault (and thus my responsibility
              to correct), not yours.

              If K7C uploads their logs to LotW, they will upload them with the
              operator set to K7C, not KH7/K7C. To ensure a match, you must log
              them as K7C.

              Yes, DXLab (DXKeeper, to be precise) synchronizes with LotW, and for
              each QSO tracks
              - whether the QSO was uploaded to LotW
              - whether LotW accepted the QSO
              - whether the QSO is confirmed via LotW (e.g. "matched")

              DXKeeper's filtering mechanism lets you display only the subset of
              QSOs in your log that meet specified criteria, e.g. "callsign
              contains a slash and accepted by LotW but not confirmed by LotW".

              73,

              Dave, AA6YQ
              --- In ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com, "Ford Peterson" <n0fp@a...> wrote:
              > Dave wrote:
              >
              > ...snip...
              >
              > > As far as I know, LotW won't help you identify unmatchable QSOs;
              if
              > > you upload a QSO whose callsign is KH7/K7C, it will just sit in
              LotW
              > > and never generate a QSL. Some logging applications can show you
              all
              > > uploaded-but-not-yet-matched QSOs. If you always used
              the "slash"
              > > approach, filtering your log to display only QSOs whose
              callsigns
              > > contain a slash, have been uploaded to LotW, but have not been
              > > matched would significantly reduce the number of QSOs to be
              manually
              > > scanned.
              > >
              > > Correction will also be manual, although some logging
              applications
              > > will let you correct multiple QSOs with one set of actions. If
              > > you've logged KH7/K7C on 5 bands, for example, you would be able
              to
              > > select them all, and then change all of their callsigns to K7C
              with
              > > one action.
              > >
              > > 73,
              > >
              > > Dave, AA6YQ
              >
              > Dave,
              >
              > Thanks for the input. I can sort out my log in terms of "/" but
              many calls are likely accurate that contain a "/". For example, a
              friend of mine works contests at different locations. As many
              contesters know, signing KH7/K7C is far more effective than
              K7C/KH7. The accurate way to sign your call from KH7 would be
              AA6YQ/KH7. Yet this has almost universally become KH7/AA6YQ. The
              reason is, during a DX contest, running a frequency and signing
              AA6YQ/KH7 would result in far fewer QSOs than the other way around.
              Why? Because the listener is spinning the dial before you get to
              the "Q" much less the "/".
              >
              > So how do you enter this situation in light of the fact that the
              DX may likely submit his call the right way, yet you would submit
              your call the way it was sent on the air? The way it should be? or
              the way that it is likely to be? (e.g. K7C)
              >
              > Does DXLAB support the "upload but no match" feature? Or is there
              another software package?
              >
              > Ford-N0FP
              > ford@c...
            • Dave Bernstein
              It absolutely matters, Hans. Unless the callsign on the QSO you upload is K7C, there will be no match, and therefore no credit. I take it back, there is a way
              Message 6 of 10 , Oct 1, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                It absolutely matters, Hans. Unless the callsign on the QSO you
                upload is K7C, there will be no match, and therefore no credit.

                I take it back, there is a way for such a match to be generated:
                convince the K7C team to upload their log with the operator set to
                KH7/K7C. The LotW guys probably wouldn't appreciate the same 50K
                QSOs being uploaded with two different operator callsigns, but it
                would eliminate Ford's problem. It wouldn't be the first time this
                trick was used, but this would probably set a record for scale.

                73,

                Dave, AA6YQ

                --- In ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com, "K0HB " <K-Zero-HB@e...> wrote:
                >
                > My logger (HyperLog) allows me to manually over-ride
                the "calculated"
                > entity. Perhaps yours has a similar capability.
                >
                > In the end it probably doesn't matter anyhow, as LoTW will credit
                you with
                > the entity the that K7C's certificate stipulates.
                >
                > 73, de Hans, K0HB
                > --
                > http://www.home.earthlink.net/~k0hb
                >
                >
                > > [Original Message]
                > > From: Ford Peterson <n0fp@a...>
                > > To: <ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com>
                > > Date: 10/1/2005 5:25:17 PM
                > > Subject: [ARRL-LOTW] Matching prefixes
                > >
                > > I have been using Logger 16 bit for my station log since time
                began. I
                > need to upgrade it and am evaluating alternatives. I'm stuck in
                the "if it
                > ain't broke, don't fix it" mode. But I have a question about
                prefixes
                > >
                > > The K7C operation, when entered, comes up at a 7 call. So, I
                make the
                > entry KH7/K7C and life is good--the log's reports are accurate.
                But, if I
                > upload this to LOTW, I don't think it will match will it? I am
                betting
                > I've got a pretty good percentage of my log (28,000 QSOs, about
                50% of
                > which are DX) that has fallen prey to my behavior when logging.
                > >
                > > Anybody got ideas as to the 'fix?' Is there a way to identify
                issues
                > with my LOTW data that will allow me to correct the situation by
                pointing
                > me to the QSOs in question?
                > >
                > > Ford-N0FP
                > > ford@c...
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
              • K0HB
                I believe you re mistaken, Dave. I upload the call (in this case K7C) that the station uses, without any tinkering on my part. If I upload K7C it doesn t
                Message 7 of 10 , Oct 1, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  I believe you're mistaken, Dave. I upload the call (in this case K7C) that
                  the station uses, without any tinkering on my part.

                  If I upload K7C it doesn't matter a hoot to LoTW what entity my logger
                  assigned to it.

                  I will get credited with the entity that the K7C LoTW certificate
                  specifies, EVEN IF MY LOGGER DOESN'T ASSIGN AN ENTITY, OR IF IT ASSIGNS AN
                  INCORRECT ENTITY.

                  73, de Hans, K0HB

                  --
                  http://www.home.earthlink.net/~k0hb


                  > [Original Message]
                  > From: Dave Bernstein <aa6yq@...>
                  > To: <ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com>
                  > Date: 10/2/2005 1:18:39 AM
                  > Subject: [ARRL-LOTW] Re: Matching prefixes
                  >
                  > It absolutely matters, Hans. Unless the callsign on the QSO you
                  > upload is K7C, there will be no match, and therefore no credit.
                  >
                  > I take it back, there is a way for such a match to be generated:
                  > convince the K7C team to upload their log with the operator set to
                  > KH7/K7C. The LotW guys probably wouldn't appreciate the same 50K
                  > QSOs being uploaded with two different operator callsigns, but it
                  > would eliminate Ford's problem. It wouldn't be the first time this
                  > trick was used, but this would probably set a record for scale.
                  >
                  > 73,
                  >
                  > Dave, AA6YQ
                  >
                  > --- In ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com, "K0HB " <K-Zero-HB@e...> wrote:
                  > >
                  > > My logger (HyperLog) allows me to manually over-ride
                  > the "calculated"
                  > > entity. Perhaps yours has a similar capability.
                  > >
                  > > In the end it probably doesn't matter anyhow, as LoTW will credit
                  > you with
                  > > the entity the that K7C's certificate stipulates.
                  > >
                  > > 73, de Hans, K0HB
                  > > --
                  > > http://www.home.earthlink.net/~k0hb
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > > [Original Message]
                  > > > From: Ford Peterson <n0fp@a...>
                  > > > To: <ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com>
                  > > > Date: 10/1/2005 5:25:17 PM
                  > > > Subject: [ARRL-LOTW] Matching prefixes
                  > > >
                  > > > I have been using Logger 16 bit for my station log since time
                  > began. I
                  > > need to upgrade it and am evaluating alternatives. I'm stuck in
                  > the "if it
                  > > ain't broke, don't fix it" mode. But I have a question about
                  > prefixes
                  > > >
                  > > > The K7C operation, when entered, comes up at a 7 call. So, I
                  > make the
                  > > entry KH7/K7C and life is good--the log's reports are accurate.
                  > But, if I
                  > > upload this to LOTW, I don't think it will match will it? I am
                  > betting
                  > > I've got a pretty good percentage of my log (28,000 QSOs, about
                  > 50% of
                  > > which are DX) that has fallen prey to my behavior when logging.
                  > > >
                  > > > Anybody got ideas as to the 'fix?' Is there a way to identify
                  > issues
                  > > with my LOTW data that will allow me to correct the situation by
                  > pointing
                  > > me to the QSOs in question?
                  > > >
                  > > > Ford-N0FP
                  > > > ford@c...
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Yahoo! Groups Links
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                • Dave Bernstein
                  That s correct if you upload a QSO whose callsign is K7C, Hans, but that s not the situation Ford described. He s asking about uploading a QSO whose callsign
                  Message 8 of 10 , Oct 1, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    That's correct if you upload a QSO whose callsign is K7C, Hans, but
                    that's not the situation Ford described. He's asking about uploading
                    a QSO whose callsign is KH7/K7C.

                    Ford's not doing that to convey "Kure" to LotW; as you point out,
                    LotW knows that K7C is on Kure from K7C's certificate. Ford is
                    logging the QSO as KH7/K7C to force his logging application to
                    record the QSO's DXCC entity as Kure, presumably so that its award
                    tracking will be accurate. But having logged the QSO as KH7/K7C, it
                    will be uploaded to LotW as KH7/K7C, where it will remain unmatched.

                    73,

                    Dave, AA6YQ

                    --- In ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com, "K0HB " <K-Zero-HB@e...> wrote:
                    > I believe you're mistaken, Dave. I upload the call (in this case
                    K7C) that
                    > the station uses, without any tinkering on my part.
                    >
                    > If I upload K7C it doesn't matter a hoot to LoTW what entity my
                    logger
                    > assigned to it.
                    >
                    > I will get credited with the entity that the K7C LoTW certificate
                    > specifies, EVEN IF MY LOGGER DOESN'T ASSIGN AN ENTITY, OR IF IT
                    ASSIGNS AN
                    > INCORRECT ENTITY.
                    >
                    > 73, de Hans, K0HB
                    >
                    > --
                    > http://www.home.earthlink.net/~k0hb
                    >
                    >
                    > > [Original Message]
                    > > From: Dave Bernstein <aa6yq@a...>
                    > > To: <ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com>
                    > > Date: 10/2/2005 1:18:39 AM
                    > > Subject: [ARRL-LOTW] Re: Matching prefixes
                    > >
                    > > It absolutely matters, Hans. Unless the callsign on the QSO you
                    > > upload is K7C, there will be no match, and therefore no credit.
                    > >
                    > > I take it back, there is a way for such a match to be generated:
                    > > convince the K7C team to upload their log with the operator set
                    to
                    > > KH7/K7C. The LotW guys probably wouldn't appreciate the same 50K
                    > > QSOs being uploaded with two different operator callsigns, but
                    it
                    > > would eliminate Ford's problem. It wouldn't be the first time
                    this
                    > > trick was used, but this would probably set a record for scale.
                    > >
                    > > 73,
                    > >
                    > > Dave, AA6YQ
                    > >
                    > > --- In ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com, "K0HB " <K-Zero-HB@e...> wrote:
                    > > >
                    > > > My logger (HyperLog) allows me to manually over-ride
                    > > the "calculated"
                    > > > entity. Perhaps yours has a similar capability.
                    > > >
                    > > > In the end it probably doesn't matter anyhow, as LoTW will
                    credit
                    > > you with
                    > > > the entity the that K7C's certificate stipulates.
                    > > >
                    > > > 73, de Hans, K0HB
                    > > > --
                    > > > http://www.home.earthlink.net/~k0hb
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > > > [Original Message]
                    > > > > From: Ford Peterson <n0fp@a...>
                    > > > > To: <ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com>
                    > > > > Date: 10/1/2005 5:25:17 PM
                    > > > > Subject: [ARRL-LOTW] Matching prefixes
                    > > > >
                    > > > > I have been using Logger 16 bit for my station log since
                    time
                    > > began. I
                    > > > need to upgrade it and am evaluating alternatives. I'm stuck
                    in
                    > > the "if it
                    > > > ain't broke, don't fix it" mode. But I have a question about
                    > > prefixes
                    > > > >
                    > > > > The K7C operation, when entered, comes up at a 7 call. So,
                    I
                    > > make the
                    > > > entry KH7/K7C and life is good--the log's reports are
                    accurate.
                    > > But, if I
                    > > > upload this to LOTW, I don't think it will match will it? I
                    am
                    > > betting
                    > > > I've got a pretty good percentage of my log (28,000 QSOs,
                    about
                    > > 50% of
                    > > > which are DX) that has fallen prey to my behavior when logging.
                    > > > >
                    > > > > Anybody got ideas as to the 'fix?' Is there a way to
                    identify
                    > > issues
                    > > > with my LOTW data that will allow me to correct the situation
                    by
                    > > pointing
                    > > > me to the QSOs in question?
                    > > > >
                    > > > > Ford-N0FP
                    > > > > ford@c...
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                  • Art RX9TX
                    Hello Ford, Saturday, October 1, 2005 Ford Peterson wrote to ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com: FP The K7C operation, when entered, comes up at a 7 call. So, I FP
                    Message 9 of 10 , Oct 2, 2005
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Hello Ford,

                      Saturday, October 1, 2005 Ford Peterson wrote to ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com:

                      FP> The K7C operation, when entered, comes up at a 7 call. So, I
                      FP> make the entry KH7/K7C and life is good--the log's reports are
                      FP> accurate.

                      I do not remember how it works in L16, but in Logger32 you can add K7C
                      to the database for Kure calls, just like it is done for K5K, K7K and
                      some other calls of that sort. Next version of L32 will have corrected
                      database installation coming with it. Just do the L16 upgrade to L32
                      and log the calls exactly the way the operators spell them.

                      --
                      73...Art RX9TX 02-Oct-05 09:37 UTC

                      http://rx9tx.qrz.ru

                      "Never give advice unless asked." [German proverb]
                    • FireBrick
                      ... From: Art RX9TX To: Ford Peterson Sent: Sunday, October 02, 2005 4:43 AM Subject: Re: [ARRL-LOTW] Matching
                      Message 10 of 10 , Oct 2, 2005
                      • 0 Attachment
                        ----- Original Message -----
                        From: "Art RX9TX" <rx9tx@...>
                        To: "Ford Peterson" <ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com>
                        Sent: Sunday, October 02, 2005 4:43 AM
                        Subject: Re: [ARRL-LOTW] Matching prefixes


                        > Hello Ford,
                        >
                        > Saturday, October 1, 2005 Ford Peterson wrote to ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com:
                        >
                        > FP> The K7C operation, when entered, comes up at a 7 call. So, I
                        > FP> make the entry KH7/K7C and life is good--the log's reports are
                        > FP> accurate.
                        >
                        > I do not remember how it works in L16, but in Logger32 you can add K7C
                        > to the database for Kure calls, just like it is done for K5K, K7K and
                        > some other calls of that sort. Next version of L32 will have corrected
                        > database installation coming with it. Just do the L16 upgrade to L32
                        > and log the calls exactly the way the operators spell them.
                        >
                        > --
                        > 73...Art RX9TX 02-Oct-05 09:37 UTC
                        >
                        > http://rx9tx.qrz.ru
                        >
                        > "Never give advice unless asked." [German proverb]
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > SPONSORED LINKS Hobby and craft supply Craft hobby Hobbies and crafts
                        > Ham radio
                        >
                        >
                        > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
                        >
                        > a.. Visit your group "ARRL-LOTW" on the web.
                        >
                        > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                        > ARRL-LOTW-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                        >
                        > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
                        >
                        >
                        > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        >
                        >
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.