Re: [vdr] sub channel numbering system

2008-03-11 Thread jori.hamalainen
 People I know dealing with this issue pad the channel numbers 
 by adding a set number.  For example, if provider A and provider 
 B both use - for their channel numbers, the user pads 
 one of the providers by adding say 1 to the channel numbers 
 thus having one provider retain -, and the other becoming 1-1.

Well, it comes to my mind that you should just use normal 'main' channel 
numbers.

If you usually watch it in HD, then mark that with main channel number. Then 
put another version of the channel (SD) to same number * 100 (or 1000).

15 ABC HD
1500 ABC SD

or for easy remote use, for alternative channel triple the last digit.

15 ABC HD
1555 ABC SD
16 NBC HD
1666 NBC SD

Why should you select between SD/HD? Or is there a different programme on? 
I'd delete the SD ones if they show the same show :)

Also I don't understand standard channel numbers. In Finland Swedish-speaking
Yle FST thinks they are at position 5. No way, for me they are at 100 and
beyond.

I watch channels, not channel numbers. If show is coming from Sub, I know it
is 5 in my setup. So for me channel numbers are to my own preference, not 
because
somebody is saying so. Easies up the channel browsing as it happens in my
priority preference (channel numbering), not some political aspect.

EPGSearch then records my shows from channels by keywords without channel 
numbers.


___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] sub channel numbering system

2008-03-08 Thread Udo Richter
Timothy D. Lenz wrote:
 which, but not all, will be shut down in a year. For ATSC .1 is the primary
 channel and .2, .3, etc are the sub channels.  The # on the remote could
 be used for the . In the channels.conf an ATSC next channel number would
 look like:
 :@13.1

Well, at least I've never seen any TV remote with a '.', '#' or '-' key 
on it. There wouldn't be a need for such a key here anyway.

'Just adding a . to the channel number' would horribly break lots of 
things, since internally VDR assumes that any channel is identified by a 
plain old integer number. VDR and plugins use calls like 
Channels.GetByNumber(6), and not Channels.GetByNumber('6.1').

And don't even think about using floating point numbers for channels. 
Why? For example, because there is no floating point representation for 
1.1, the nearest binary floats are 1.09986677 and 
1.10008882 (rounded).

The most realistic way to implement this is to add yet another 'name' 
system for channels, so that the VDR-internal channel 15 is 
'KUAT'/'6.0'. That way, VDR could continue to use the 'simple' 
numbering, and just the channel switching would use the new numbering.

On a long term, this could even replace the 'old' :@number grouping, so 
channels are numbered straight from 1 up without gaps.

Of course there are a lot of open questions. For example, does the 
'channel up' key switch from 6.0 to 6.1 or to 7.0? Do we need two 
(three, counting the bouquet left/right) keys for channel flipping? How 
does this grouping map to the channels.conf? And what happens as soon as 
people start crying for naming channels like '2.6.1' or '2.3-5'?

This probably has to start as a separate VDR patch project, and should 
not rush into VDR core. This needs some time of gathering experience to 
find the best way of handling.

Cheers,

Udo


___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] sub channel numbering system

2008-03-08 Thread Timothy D. Lenz
The remotes that come with Nexus video cards have a telephone stile num pad
with both * and #

- Original Message - 
From: Udo Richter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: VDR Mailing List vdr@linuxtv.org
Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2008 4:05 AM
Subject: Re: [vdr] sub channel numbering system


 Timothy D. Lenz wrote:
  which, but not all, will be shut down in a year. For ATSC .1 is the
primary
  channel and .2, .3, etc are the sub channels.  The # on the remote
could
  be used for the . In the channels.conf an ATSC next channel number
would
  look like:
  :@13.1

 Well, at least I've never seen any TV remote with a '.', '#' or '-' key
 on it. There wouldn't be a need for such a key here anyway.


___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] sub channel numbering system

2008-03-07 Thread Klaus Schmidinger
On 03/06/08 21:13, Timothy D. Lenz wrote:
 Well, ., #, *, something in the channels.conf. 0 is not  a valid
 notation because 0 is part of the number system. 40 won't work for KVOA
 because 40 is KHRR. And when displayed it should be .

Well, 40 would become 400, accordingly.

Just add a 0 to each channel number (or two zeros, if you have two digit
sub channel numbers).

Klaus

 - Original Message - 
 From: Klaus Schmidinger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: vdr@linuxtv.org
 Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 1:49 AM
 Subject: Re: [vdr] sub channel numbering system
 
 
 On 03/06/08 00:49, Timothy D. Lenz wrote:
 Would it be possible to add support for the subchannel numbering system
 used
 with ATSC? Exmple of the channels in our area:

 4   KVOA
 4.1KVOAD
 6   KUAT
 6.1KUATD1
 6.2KUATK
 6.3KUATV
 6.4KUATC
 9   KGUN
 9.1KGUND
 11 KMSB
 11.1  KMSBH
 13 KOLD
 13.1  KOLD-DT
 14 KUDF
 18 KTTU
 18.1  KTTUDT
 27 KUAS
 27.1  KUASHD
 34 KFTU
 38 KUVE
 40 KHRR
 40.1  KHRR-DT
 48 K48GX
 58 KWBA
 58.1  KWBA-DT
 58.2  LATV

 All the x.x channels are the new ATSC channels, rest are old NTSC most
 of
 which, but not all, will be shut down in a year. For ATSC .1 is the
 primary
 channel and .2, .3, etc are the sub channels.  The # on the remote
 could
 be used for the . In the channels.conf an ATSC next channel number
 would
 look like:
 :@13.1
 I don't like that dot notation.

 You could add a '0' to the old channels and leave out the '.', as in

 40KVOA
 41KVOAD
 60KUAT
 61KUATD1
 62KUATK
 63KUATV
 64KUATC
 90KGUN
 91KGUND


___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] sub channel numbering system

2008-03-07 Thread Ed Hein
Hi!

On Thursday 06 March 2008 21:13:25 Timothy D. Lenz wrote:
 Well, ., #, *, something in the channels.conf. 0 is not  a
 valid notation because 0 is part of the number system. 40 won't work
 for KVOA because 40 is KHRR. And when displayed it should be .

We are talking about channel numbers, correct? Thats the arbitrary 
number I (or in the default case vdr) assign to an channel. vdr channel 
management has the advantage channel numbers even can have gaps between 
them. And I can even renumber them if I want to. So if KHRR is on 40 
just moved it up to channel number 400, following up with assigning 40 
to KHRR. Should 400 be taken by another channel, consider moving that 
one to channel number 40 or taking a free x00 number.

Cya, Ed :)

-- 
When the stars threw down their spears,  AAh! megamisama...
And water'd heaven with their tears,
Did he smile his work to see?AntHill inside
Did he who made the Lamb make thee?  Powered by caffeine
 (William Blake)
IRC: Tyger
 TarrychkReply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] sub channel numbering system

2008-03-07 Thread VDR User
On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 11:37 PM, Klaus Schmidinger
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On 03/06/08 21:13, Timothy D. Lenz wrote:
   Well, ., #, *, something in the channels.conf. 0 is not  a valid
   notation because 0 is part of the number system. 40 won't work for KVOA
   because 40 is KHRR. And when displayed it should be .

  Well, 40 would become 400, accordingly.

  Just add a 0 to each channel number (or two zeros, if you have two digit
  sub channel numbers).

Klaus, come on, you know bastardizing the channel numbers like that is
a horrible idea!  ;)

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] sub channel numbering system

2008-03-07 Thread Klaus Schmidinger
On 03/07/08 16:31, VDR User wrote:
 On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 11:37 PM, Klaus Schmidinger
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On 03/06/08 21:13, Timothy D. Lenz wrote:
   Well, ., #, *, something in the channels.conf. 0 is not  a valid
   notation because 0 is part of the number system. 40 won't work for KVOA
   because 40 is KHRR. And when displayed it should be .

  Well, 40 would become 400, accordingly.

  Just add a 0 to each channel number (or two zeros, if you have two digit
  sub channel numbers).
 
 Klaus, come on, you know bastardizing the channel numbers like that is
 a horrible idea!  ;)

Bastardizing channel numbers the way those sub channels do, that's
a horrible idea!

Channel numbers are *numbers*, *integer* numbers!
There's a first channel, and a second one, and a third one,
and they are numbered 1, 2 and 3. Now what's a 2.1 channel?
Is that ten percent more than the second channel?

VDR stores channel numbers as integers. So if you want to
have a numbering scheme where you have channels between other
channels, you need to make room for these additional entries.
And the only way I see to do this is to shift all numbers one
digit to the left.

Klaus

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] sub channel numbering system

2008-03-07 Thread Theunis Potgieter
So what happens when the sub number was 2.10 is it now 21? And 2.11
becomes 21?  I don't understand why there are such numbers to begin
with. Why not just map 2.1 to the next available open number, giving
the user the choice to move the channels in any order afterwards?

my 2c

On 3/7/08, Klaus Schmidinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On 03/07/08 16:31, VDR User wrote:
  On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 11:37 PM, Klaus Schmidinger
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  On 03/06/08 21:13, Timothy D. Lenz wrote:
Well, ., #, *, something in the channels.conf. 0 is not  a
 valid
notation because 0 is part of the number system. 40 won't work for
 KVOA
because 40 is KHRR. And when displayed it should be .
 
   Well, 40 would become 400, accordingly.
 
   Just add a 0 to each channel number (or two zeros, if you have two digit
   sub channel numbers).
 
  Klaus, come on, you know bastardizing the channel numbers like that is
  a horrible idea!  ;)

 Bastardizing channel numbers the way those sub channels do, that's
 a horrible idea!

 Channel numbers are *numbers*, *integer* numbers!
 There's a first channel, and a second one, and a third one,
 and they are numbered 1, 2 and 3. Now what's a 2.1 channel?
 Is that ten percent more than the second channel?

 VDR stores channel numbers as integers. So if you want to
 have a numbering scheme where you have channels between other
 channels, you need to make room for these additional entries.
 And the only way I see to do this is to shift all numbers one
 digit to the left.

 Klaus

 ___
 vdr mailing list
 vdr@linuxtv.org
 http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] sub channel numbering system

2008-03-07 Thread jhall
On Fri, Mar 07, 2008 at 04:57:50PM +0100, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
 On 03/07/08 16:31, VDR User wrote:
  On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 11:37 PM, Klaus Schmidinger
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  On 03/06/08 21:13, Timothy D. Lenz wrote:
Well, ., #, *, something in the channels.conf. 0 is not  a valid
notation because 0 is part of the number system. 40 won't work for KVOA
because 40 is KHRR. And when displayed it should be .
 
   Well, 40 would become 400, accordingly.
 
   Just add a 0 to each channel number (or two zeros, if you have two digit
   sub channel numbers).
  
  Klaus, come on, you know bastardizing the channel numbers like that is
  a horrible idea!  ;)
 
 Bastardizing channel numbers the way those sub channels do, that's
 a horrible idea!
 
 Channel numbers are *numbers*, *integer* numbers!
 There's a first channel, and a second one, and a third one,
 and they are numbered 1, 2 and 3. Now what's a 2.1 channel?
 Is that ten percent more than the second channel?
 
 VDR stores channel numbers as integers. So if you want to
 have a numbering scheme where you have channels between other
 channels, you need to make room for these additional entries.
 And the only way I see to do this is to shift all numbers one
 digit to the left.
 
 Klaus
 
I'm sorry if you don't see it the way the rest of us do, but the goal
here should be the user experience.  The channels are advertised from
the channel makers as 2-1, 2-2, or 2.1, 2.2, or 2*1, 2*2 or whatever.
When users go to a channel, they are not thinking:

hmm what channel number shal I go to

no they know

if I want to watch WJLA, I go to 7*1 for the HD version, or 7*2 for
the SD version.  They know this because that is how it is advertised
to them in their markets.  They have accepted that channels are not
just integers.

The other issue you have is that channels in their system have
well-known identifiers that are called channels for example NASATV
is called channel 213.  This is something we have talked about in the
past both on and off-list.  If you want to somehow map these
subchannels to some wierd integer that's say greater than a million,
that's fine, your channel numbers are integers, but the user needs to
be able to select the channel he wants.  Is the goal here that the
user is able to use the program or that channels can continue to
antiquatedly be identified as ints?

_J

 ___
 vdr mailing list
 vdr@linuxtv.org
 http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] sub channel numbering system

2008-03-07 Thread VDR User
On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 7:57 AM, Klaus Schmidinger
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  VDR stores channel numbers as integers. So if you want to
  have a numbering scheme where you have channels between other
  channels, you need to make room for these additional entries.
  And the only way I see to do this is to shift all numbers one
  digit to the left.

For example, channel 6.1 should not become 61 and force the real 61 to
become something else.  It's pretty obvious thats a terrible way to
address the issue.  The idea is to keep channel numbers in sync with
the provider, not change it all around because of a personal dislike.

Yes, I understand at present VDR stores channel numbers as integers,
and maybe that should change to better suit current/future needs
(scaled integers?).  Afterall, channel numbers aren't defined as
integers by specification, that was simply a VDR design decision made
long ago when this issue didn't exist.

If you are really disgusted by using . (which -is- the most commonly
accepted  used numbering sub-system) to denote sub-channels then
maybe someone can brainstorm a different solution that's reasonable.
Hopefully others will chime in on this although I think Timothy Lenz's
previous post sums it up pretty clearly...

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] sub channel numbering system

2008-03-07 Thread Theunis Potgieter
So if provider 1 broadcasts  a 2.1 channel and provider 2 also
broadcasts a 2.1 channel and you as a vdr user can have more than 1
provider. What will the channel numbering scheme be for Provider 2?
Will this introduce a bouqet in vdr?

On 3/7/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On Fri, Mar 07, 2008 at 04:57:50PM +0100, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
  On 03/07/08 16:31, VDR User wrote:
   On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 11:37 PM, Klaus Schmidinger
   [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
   On 03/06/08 21:13, Timothy D. Lenz wrote:
 Well, ., #, *, something in the channels.conf. 0 is not  a
 valid
 notation because 0 is part of the number system. 40 won't work for
 KVOA
 because 40 is KHRR. And when displayed it should be .
  
Well, 40 would become 400, accordingly.
  
Just add a 0 to each channel number (or two zeros, if you have two
 digit
sub channel numbers).
  
   Klaus, come on, you know bastardizing the channel numbers like that is
   a horrible idea!  ;)
 
  Bastardizing channel numbers the way those sub channels do, that's
  a horrible idea!
 
  Channel numbers are *numbers*, *integer* numbers!
  There's a first channel, and a second one, and a third one,
  and they are numbered 1, 2 and 3. Now what's a 2.1 channel?
  Is that ten percent more than the second channel?
 
  VDR stores channel numbers as integers. So if you want to
  have a numbering scheme where you have channels between other
  channels, you need to make room for these additional entries.
  And the only way I see to do this is to shift all numbers one
  digit to the left.
 
  Klaus
 
 I'm sorry if you don't see it the way the rest of us do, but the goal
 here should be the user experience.  The channels are advertised from
 the channel makers as 2-1, 2-2, or 2.1, 2.2, or 2*1, 2*2 or whatever.
 When users go to a channel, they are not thinking:

 hmm what channel number shal I go to

 no they know

 if I want to watch WJLA, I go to 7*1 for the HD version, or 7*2 for
 the SD version.  They know this because that is how it is advertised
 to them in their markets.  They have accepted that channels are not
 just integers.

 The other issue you have is that channels in their system have
 well-known identifiers that are called channels for example NASATV
 is called channel 213.  This is something we have talked about in the
 past both on and off-list.  If you want to somehow map these
 subchannels to some wierd integer that's say greater than a million,
 that's fine, your channel numbers are integers, but the user needs to
 be able to select the channel he wants.  Is the goal here that the
 user is able to use the program or that channels can continue to
 antiquatedly be identified as ints?

 _J

  ___
  vdr mailing list
  vdr@linuxtv.org
  http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr

 ___
 vdr mailing list
 vdr@linuxtv.org
 http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] sub channel numbering system

2008-03-07 Thread Rolf Ahrenberg
On Fri, 7 Mar 2008, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:

 Channel numbers are *numbers*, *integer* numbers!
 There's a first channel, and a second one, and a third one,
 and they are numbered 1, 2 and 3. Now what's a 2.1 channel?
 Is that ten percent more than the second channel?

Well, integer channel numbers are used in Europe, where every subchannel 
are handled as a main channel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_channel

..IIRC there were some requests for supporting LCN a long time ago, so 
this thread seems to be just a reminder for it.

BR,
--
rofa

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] sub channel numbering system

2008-03-07 Thread VDR User
On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 8:46 AM, Theunis Potgieter
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 So if provider 1 broadcasts  a 2.1 channel and provider 2 also
  broadcasts a 2.1 channel and you as a vdr user can have more than 1
  provider. What will the channel numbering scheme be for Provider 2?
  Will this introduce a bouqet in vdr?

That problem already exists even without sub-channels and has never
been officially addressed (to my knowledge).  The people I know
dealing with this issue pad the channel numbers by adding a set
number.  For example, if provider A and provider B both use -
for their channel numbers, the user pads one of the providers by
adding say 1 to the channel numbers thus having one provider
retain -, and the other becoming 1-1.

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] sub channel numbering system

2008-03-07 Thread Theunis Potgieter
Then perhaps the core should expose the required features, so that
Klaus can keep it his default way but a plugin can extend without
having to patch the core. The end user can then choose from a range of
plugins for his/her provider(s) in the way they think is best.

On 3/7/08, VDR User [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 8:46 AM, Theunis Potgieter
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  So if provider 1 broadcasts  a 2.1 channel and provider 2 also
   broadcasts a 2.1 channel and you as a vdr user can have more than 1
   provider. What will the channel numbering scheme be for Provider 2?
   Will this introduce a bouqet in vdr?

 That problem already exists even without sub-channels and has never
 been officially addressed (to my knowledge).  The people I know
 dealing with this issue pad the channel numbers by adding a set
 number.  For example, if provider A and provider B both use -
 for their channel numbers, the user pads one of the providers by
 adding say 1 to the channel numbers thus having one provider
 retain -, and the other becoming 1-1.

 ___
 vdr mailing list
 vdr@linuxtv.org
 http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] sub channel numbering system

2008-03-07 Thread Alex Lasnier
Timothy D. Lenz wrote:
 Would it be possible to add support for the subchannel numbering system used
 with ATSC? Exmple of the channels in our area:

Since VDR needs to be patched for ATSC anyway, I'll consider adding 
sub-channel support in the next ATSC patch. But my first impression is 
that such a change will likely be very ugly and break many things...

However, none of the North American satellite providers have channel 
numbers lower than 50 (I think) so the easiest solution is to number 
your ATSC channels from 1 to 49. Is it really that important that your 
channel numbers match the broadcaster's?






___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] sub channel numbering system

2008-03-07 Thread VDR User
On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 9:47 AM, Alex Lasnier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  Since VDR needs to be patched for ATSC anyway, I'll consider adding
  sub-channel support in the next ATSC patch. But my first impression is
  that such a change will likely be very ugly and break many things...

  However, none of the North American satellite providers have channel
  numbers lower than 50 (I think) so the easiest solution is to number
  your ATSC channels from 1 to 49. Is it really that important that your
  channel numbers match the broadcaster's?

Why wouldn't you want your channel numbers to match that of your
provider(s)?  Isn't it a better idea to have proper support for this
rather then forcing channels into certain # ranges, or anything other
then what they're intended to be?  What possible side-effects exist in
relation to EPG data?

Call me crazy, I just believe proper support for sub-channels, and
multiple providers using the same channel numbers for that matter,
should take priority over some hack that technically works.  The use
of regular integers for channel numbers has become outdated thus
justifying a change to something more suitable.  I don't see any good
reason to think this is a bad idea, especially since the issue won't
go away and only get bigger over time, no different then that of
dvb-s2 and hdtv.

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] sub channel numbering system

2008-03-07 Thread Timothy D. Lenz
That is something I brought up some time ago before I ran into the
sub-numbering. The Channels.conf has a way to group by provider, but right
now the only place to make use of it from in the program is while in live
video using the  keys. If Provider grouping was expanded on then number
reuse would be solved.

(1)Confine channel selection to the current provider group would allow reuse
of numbers.

(2)Provide a way to more easly direct select providers. Remotes don't really
have a useable ascii keyboard, but they could be given numbers and their own
menu. Right now :@ denotes a channel, :abc denotes a
section/provider/whatever. Apply a version of the number system to the
provider grouping. If a number is not used, it starts counting from the last
used provider number. If no numbers where used, then it starts with 1 with 0
reservered for the provider guide. The new group entry would be :xx abc or
even :xxabc. basicly, if the first charator/s are digits, then they are a
user assigned number for that provider. If the Provders name starts with a
number, then just use a space, for example : 1 abc.

Now start a number with * if you are changing providers and use *0 for
the menu of providers which would work just like a menu for channels. Only
when switching to another provider it would land on the first channel in
that providers list.

(3)As for VDR relying on channel numbers being a problem for adding
subchannel suport. This is from the manual that is packed with VDR:

A particular channel can be uniquely identified by its channel ID,
which is a string that looks like this:

S19.2E-1-1089-12003-0

VDR already dosn't depend soly on channel numbers according to that.

- Original Message - 
From: Theunis Potgieter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: VDR Mailing List vdr@linuxtv.org
Sent: Friday, March 07, 2008 9:46 AM
Subject: Re: [vdr] sub channel numbering system


 So if provider 1 broadcasts  a 2.1 channel and provider 2 also
 broadcasts a 2.1 channel and you as a vdr user can have more than 1
 provider. What will the channel numbering scheme be for Provider 2?
 Will this introduce a bouqet in vdr?

 On 3/7/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  On Fri, Mar 07, 2008 at 04:57:50PM +0100, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
   On 03/07/08 16:31, VDR User wrote:
On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 11:37 PM, Klaus Schmidinger


___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] sub channel numbering system

2008-03-07 Thread Timothy D. Lenz
And that works to a point. I have been trying to pad using the sat number
for example 79, 97, 113, etc. But this makes the numbers a bit
long. The problem here is that some providers like to sprawl with there
numbers using 4 and sometimes even 5 digits. The 5 digit channel problem is
minor though as those seem to tend to be data channels with nothing on them.

- Original Message - 
From: VDR User [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: VDR Mailing List vdr@linuxtv.org
Sent: Friday, March 07, 2008 9:53 AM
Subject: Re: [vdr] sub channel numbering system


 On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 8:46 AM, Theunis Potgieter
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  So if provider 1 broadcasts  a 2.1 channel and provider 2 also
   broadcasts a 2.1 channel and you as a vdr user can have more than 1
   provider. What will the channel numbering scheme be for Provider 2?
   Will this introduce a bouqet in vdr?

 That problem already exists even without sub-channels and has never
 been officially addressed (to my knowledge).  The people I know
 dealing with this issue pad the channel numbers by adding a set
 number.  For example, if provider A and provider B both use -
 for their channel numbers, the user pads one of the providers by
 adding say 1 to the channel numbers thus having one provider
 retain -, and the other becoming 1-1.

 ___
 vdr mailing list
 vdr@linuxtv.org
 http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] sub channel numbering system

2008-03-07 Thread Timothy D. Lenz
From what I have seen, the bigger providers start with 100. Smaller FTA
broadcasters seomtimes don't even number their channels and are assigned 0.
So for many of the channels, they just given the next free number paded with
the sat angle number. For OTA ATSC channels, if you live in/near a major
city or between 2 major citys, you will have a lot of channels and it is
much nicer if you can use the channel number assigned. Must people refer to
channels by the number and it is by the number that you select the channel.
If someone says there is somthing coming on channel 9 and don't sue the same
numbers, then you first have to figure out what channel 9 is, then find it
in your number system. The channel number has been the most common way to
refer to a local channel for decades.

- Original Message - 
From: Alex Lasnier [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: VDR Mailing List vdr@linuxtv.org
Sent: Friday, March 07, 2008 10:47 AM
Subject: Re: [vdr] sub channel numbering system


 Timothy D. Lenz wrote:
  Would it be possible to add support for the subchannel numbering system
used
  with ATSC? Exmple of the channels in our area:

 Since VDR needs to be patched for ATSC anyway, I'll consider adding
 sub-channel support in the next ATSC patch. But my first impression is
 that such a change will likely be very ugly and break many things...

 However, none of the North American satellite providers have channel
 numbers lower than 50 (I think) so the easiest solution is to number
 your ATSC channels from 1 to 49. Is it really that important that your
 channel numbers match the broadcaster's?






 ___
 vdr mailing list
 vdr@linuxtv.org
 http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] sub channel numbering system

2008-03-06 Thread Klaus Schmidinger
On 03/06/08 00:49, Timothy D. Lenz wrote:
 Would it be possible to add support for the subchannel numbering system used
 with ATSC? Exmple of the channels in our area:
 
 4   KVOA
 4.1KVOAD
 6   KUAT
 6.1KUATD1
 6.2KUATK
 6.3KUATV
 6.4KUATC
 9   KGUN
 9.1KGUND
 11 KMSB
 11.1  KMSBH
 13 KOLD
 13.1  KOLD-DT
 14 KUDF
 18 KTTU
 18.1  KTTUDT
 27 KUAS
 27.1  KUASHD
 34 KFTU
 38 KUVE
 40 KHRR
 40.1  KHRR-DT
 48 K48GX
 58 KWBA
 58.1  KWBA-DT
 58.2  LATV
 
 All the x.x channels are the new ATSC channels, rest are old NTSC most of
 which, but not all, will be shut down in a year. For ATSC .1 is the primary
 channel and .2, .3, etc are the sub channels.  The # on the remote could
 be used for the . In the channels.conf an ATSC next channel number would
 look like:
 :@13.1

I don't like that dot notation.

You could add a '0' to the old channels and leave out the '.', as in

40KVOA
41KVOAD
60KUAT
61KUATD1
62KUATK
63KUATV
64KUATC
90KGUN
91KGUND

Klaus

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] sub channel numbering system

2008-03-06 Thread VDR User
On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 12:49 AM, Klaus Schmidinger
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  I don't like that dot notation.

  You could add a '0' to the old channels and leave out the '.', as in

  40KVOA
  41KVOAD
  60KUAT
  61KUATD1
  62KUATK
  63KUATV
  64KUATC
  90KGUN
  91KGUND

That's fine as long as you don't actually have channel 60, 61, 62, 63,
etc..  I don't particularly like the . either, but this method isn't
any better.

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] sub channel numbering system

2008-03-06 Thread Klaus Schmidinger
On 03/06/08 17:36, VDR User wrote:
 On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 12:49 AM, Klaus Schmidinger
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  I don't like that dot notation.

  You could add a '0' to the old channels and leave out the '.', as in

  40KVOA
  41KVOAD
  60KUAT
  61KUATD1
  62KUATK
  63KUATV
  64KUATC
  90KGUN
  91KGUND
 
 That's fine as long as you don't actually have channel 60, 61, 62, 63,
 etc..  I don't particularly like the . either, but this method isn't
 any better.

Well, at least it doesn't require an additional symbol.
Besides, channel numbers are just that: numbers - and that's *integers*,
not decimals ;-)

Klaus

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] sub channel numbering system

2008-03-06 Thread Timothy D. Lenz
Well, ., #, *, something in the channels.conf. 0 is not  a valid
notation because 0 is part of the number system. 40 won't work for KVOA
because 40 is KHRR. And when displayed it should be .

- Original Message - 
From: Klaus Schmidinger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vdr@linuxtv.org
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 1:49 AM
Subject: Re: [vdr] sub channel numbering system


 On 03/06/08 00:49, Timothy D. Lenz wrote:
  Would it be possible to add support for the subchannel numbering system
used
  with ATSC? Exmple of the channels in our area:
 
  4   KVOA
  4.1KVOAD
  6   KUAT
  6.1KUATD1
  6.2KUATK
  6.3KUATV
  6.4KUATC
  9   KGUN
  9.1KGUND
  11 KMSB
  11.1  KMSBH
  13 KOLD
  13.1  KOLD-DT
  14 KUDF
  18 KTTU
  18.1  KTTUDT
  27 KUAS
  27.1  KUASHD
  34 KFTU
  38 KUVE
  40 KHRR
  40.1  KHRR-DT
  48 K48GX
  58 KWBA
  58.1  KWBA-DT
  58.2  LATV
 
  All the x.x channels are the new ATSC channels, rest are old NTSC most
of
  which, but not all, will be shut down in a year. For ATSC .1 is the
primary
  channel and .2, .3, etc are the sub channels.  The # on the remote
could
  be used for the . In the channels.conf an ATSC next channel number
would
  look like:
  :@13.1

 I don't like that dot notation.

 You could add a '0' to the old channels and leave out the '.', as in

 40KVOA
 41KVOAD
 60KUAT
 61KUATD1
 62KUATK
 63KUATV
 64KUATC
 90KGUN
 91KGUND

 Klaus

 ___
 vdr mailing list
 vdr@linuxtv.org
 http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] sub channel numbering system

2008-03-06 Thread Timothy D. Lenz
Like it or not Sub channels are here to stay and the . is the standard for
denoting a sub number. vdr-1.5.15

- Original Message - 
From: Klaus Schmidinger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vdr@linuxtv.org
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 1:49 AM
Subject: Re: [vdr] sub channel numbering system

 I don't like that dot notation.



___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] sub channel numbering system

2008-03-06 Thread VDR User
On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 12:20 PM, Timothy D. Lenz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Like it or not Sub channels are here to stay and the . is the standard for
  denoting a sub number. vdr-1.5.15

Can't argue with that!  ;)

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr