Re: [HCDX] WRTH 2004. New approach.

["Dmitry Nefedov" <dnefedov@xxxxxxx>]

Hi Andy,

Thanks for the feedback too.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Andy Sennitt" <andys@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [HCDX] WRTH 2004. New approach.

> > Is it impossible to agree on a standardised schedule interchange
> > file format?
> > Is it impossible to develop the compiling software application?
>
> For all sorts of reasons, some broadcasters don't want their data
> included in the public HFCC lists. Some want only certain data included. A
> lot of it has to do with politics and business confidentiality. Even if
> every shortwave broadcaster in the world did as you suggest, you would get
> an incomplete listing, and maybe even deliberately misleading data.

I assume that most broadcasters will be good enough to provide schedules in
the standard form if many listeners request it ('many' is obviously the
keyword here). For those broadcasters that will not provide schedules or will
provide misleading data (hopefully a few of them), there will be people among
us (monitors) who would provide us with correct schedules for those stations.


> That would lead to huge frustration on the part of the reader.

I think that my concern is more for the people who compile schedule databases
(such as ILGRadio, Eike Bierwirth's schedules, the Prime Time, and there are
more) and update them during a season, and also for people who use these
databases, rather than for readers of a one-time-in-a-season publication .
Most of the work on compiling and updating schedule databases can be
automated.

And the important thing for an average SW listener is that s/he would not
depend on some centralised source of schedule databases (ILGRadio, etc). S/he
could easily compile a comprehensive seasonal schedule using all these
decentralised pieces.



I just had another idea. As I said, this thing will mostly benefit us, the
listeners, not the stations. In this way it is up to us to make this thing
work. We should not depend on the stations to provide schedules in the
standard format. They could provide schedules in any way they want. But
everyone of us could convert schedules of just two or three stations (those
that one is the most interested in) and then redistribute it. In this way
there will be a flow of such small decentralised pieces, which together would
constitute one big seasonal schedule.

'Decentralised' is the keyword in this case.


Well, as I said in the first message, this is my attempt at dealing with this
area of reality. I think this is pretty good for an attempt.

Thanks for your attention.

Best Regards,
Dmitry Nefedov
Developer of Radio Explorer
Web site: http://www.radioexplorer.com.ru
Email: dnefedov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


---[Start Commercial]---------------------

World Radio TV Handbook 2004 is coming out! Preorder yours now! Only $20.97 through us.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0823059685/hardcoredxcom

---[End Commercial]-----------------------
________________________________________
Hard-Core-DX mailing list
Hard-Core-DX@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://dallas.hard-core-dx.com/mailman/listinfo/hard-core-dx
http://www.hard-core-dx.com/
_______________________________________________

THE INFORMATION IN THIS ARTICLE IS FREE. It may be copied, distributed
and/or modified under the conditions set down in the Design Science License
published by Michael Stutz at http://dsl.org/copyleft/dsl.txt