Tbh: I don't like this idea.

Paper QSL cards are a big thing in amateur radio. The amount of "paper waste" is minimal if you compare it against other environmental waste issues.

the only difference being the entity who prints the card. Therefore, in my opinion, it should be a valid card for awards.

I think you are wrong here. In your logic everyone who is missing the DXCC P5 can print his own PDF QSL without any legimitation. Therefore I think there is indeed a difference which entity is printing the QSL card. The DARC QSL service is a well known and trustworthy service. My printer at home is not. For reasons there are some rules defined at the ARRL and other big clubs that a QSL card is only valid with a real signature or any other verification label. Sure we can talk about a verification label in Wavelog. But why reinvent the wheel? Just use good old QSL cards, sign them by hand and put them in the mail. There is absolutely nothing wrong with it. By the way. Younger ham radio operators are pretty fascinated about the paper qsl thing. Fancy pictures on their smartphones are that interesting that holding something real in their hands. If you don't want paper QSL, use LoTW or even eQSL if pictures are a thing.

Im my honest opinion there is no need for a "new" QSL service/verification system. There are more or less trusted ones and everyone uses them.

Hey Fabian, thanks for the quick reply,

I get your point somehow and yes, I already use LoTW and co. This should be another option for someone to send/receive a QSL card. I did not talk about ditching cards completely. Basically give everyone the freedom and options to decide for themselves.

In your logic everyone who is missing the DXCC P5 can print his own PDF QSL without any legitimation.

No, not at all. That is a completely different argument. The idea I proposed needs two people playing along, DE and DX. At this point all QSL services are based on honesty. You can do the same with paper QSLs.

The proposed method will fail when you want to apply for an ARRL award as per: https://www.arrl.org/files/file/DXCC/eQSL%20Policy2010.pdf
But that is also true if you want an eqsl.cc eQSL "card" to be accepted by LoTW.
BTW: DARC seems to accept more: https://www.darc.de/der-club/referate/dx/diplome/diplome-des-darc-referates-dx/'

If the recipient prints (or maybe just adds it to his already digitized QSL library) the card I approved and sent him, where is the difference to a card I printed and mailed him via postal service, if that is fine by the recipient and myself? If it is not accepted by an entity which hands out awards that is ok, but as written above, you can argue that for already existing QSL services (e.g. eQSL cards won't work for an ARRL award)

As you as the logbook owner approve the OQRS, as you would with the paper card, the QSL is legitimated by you.

I don't want to argue against any already existing QSL services. It's just a proposition to add another form of QSL'ing

@dl3jop I like your idea about generating QSL cards with latex. Some months ago, I found a latex template for generating QSLcards. I used php-latex, but found out it needed additional software (pdflatex), so I didn't bother more at the time. When you wrote this yesterday, I looked it up again, and got it working. However, I don't see this ever becoming a part of Wavelog for several reasons:

1. It would require the installation of extra software, which again leads to more support questions.
2. A latex template would need to be provided, and then additional question about changing that and figuring out latex.
3. I think this is out of scope for what Wavelog is, even though it contains a bunch of different features.

It would probably be better that someone builds a service that takes an adif file, then generates a pdf for the QSL.