Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="noonereallycares" data-source="post: 1086792" data-attributes="member: 14179">The decision is one for you guys to make.&nbsp; If you think users would be best served by keeping the scans to as few channels as possible, then use the individual regions.&nbsp; If you think users will accept the increased scan times and redundant scan failure messages, then use the single XML file.&nbsp; If someone out there has a list of frequencies that have been removed, I'm willing to update my shell script and rebuild the XML files.&nbsp; Until then, both options will involve scanning of inactive frequencies.Since I live in a capital city, I don't have to worry about guessing which region I fall in to.&nbsp; Others may find that a bit annoying.I apologise for being so non-committal.&nbsp; I regonise that it comes off as trying to pass the buck.&nbsp; I just figure that questions of user experience are best left to be answered by the team in charge of that kind of thing.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="noonereallycares, post: 1086792, member: 14179"] The decision is one for you guys to make. If you think users would be best served by keeping the scans to as few channels as possible, then use the individual regions. If you think users will accept the increased scan times and redundant scan failure messages, then use the single XML file. If someone out there has a list of frequencies that have been removed, I'm willing to update my shell script and rebuild the XML files. Until then, both options will involve scanning of inactive frequencies. Since I live in a capital city, I don't have to worry about guessing which region I fall in to. Others may find that a bit annoying. I apologise for being so non-committal. I regonise that it comes off as trying to pass the buck. I just figure that questions of user experience are best left to be answered by the team in charge of that kind of thing. [/QUOTE]

Verification