home
products
contribute
download
documentation
forum
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
All posts
Latest activity
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
Donate
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
MediaPortal 1
Development
Improvement Suggestions
Scanning for new/updated channels results in a mess
Contact us
RSS
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="doveman" data-source="post: 703690" data-attributes="member: 67412"><p>I understand channel name is not unique, which is why it can't be used as the unique identifier and something else needs to be used. I think it's clear from my previous posts that I appreciate that. I can only assume that when channel name was used as the unique identifier however, that the actual tuning details (the three identifiers) must have been stored in a separate table and linked to the unique identifier. So if the unique identifier is now changed from channel name to the three identifiers, it would seem that there is some unneccessary duplication by having these details stored in two places, unless other changes have been made to do away with this separate table. If this separate table is still being used, it seems unneccessary to make the unique ID as complicated, when perhaps T-BBC1, T-ITV1 would suffice.</p><p></p><p>As for the DVB spec, that's a separate issue but if we know that broadcasters don't compy with it, it seems rather daft to ignore this and decide to make MP work on the assumption that broadcasters do follow it, as we know they don't and thus MP will encounter problems. I'm just trying to see if there's a better way to approach this that will make MP work better, even when broadcasters choose to ignore the spec. I think if the broadcaster changes the three identifiers but the channel name remains the same, MP could be made to be able to cope with this. It might not be possible for it to be able the handle broadcasters just changing the name, in which case perhaps the only solution is for the user to manually tell MP that channelname1 is now channelname2.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="doveman, post: 703690, member: 67412"] I understand channel name is not unique, which is why it can't be used as the unique identifier and something else needs to be used. I think it's clear from my previous posts that I appreciate that. I can only assume that when channel name was used as the unique identifier however, that the actual tuning details (the three identifiers) must have been stored in a separate table and linked to the unique identifier. So if the unique identifier is now changed from channel name to the three identifiers, it would seem that there is some unneccessary duplication by having these details stored in two places, unless other changes have been made to do away with this separate table. If this separate table is still being used, it seems unneccessary to make the unique ID as complicated, when perhaps T-BBC1, T-ITV1 would suffice. As for the DVB spec, that's a separate issue but if we know that broadcasters don't compy with it, it seems rather daft to ignore this and decide to make MP work on the assumption that broadcasters do follow it, as we know they don't and thus MP will encounter problems. I'm just trying to see if there's a better way to approach this that will make MP work better, even when broadcasters choose to ignore the spec. I think if the broadcaster changes the three identifiers but the channel name remains the same, MP could be made to be able to cope with this. It might not be possible for it to be able the handle broadcasters just changing the name, in which case perhaps the only solution is for the user to manually tell MP that channelname1 is now channelname2. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
MediaPortal 1
Development
Improvement Suggestions
Scanning for new/updated channels results in a mess
Contact us
RSS
Top
Bottom