Why can't I find my (xxxxx) data?

[ka3jjz]

It seems that question is beginning to grow a bit on the statewide forums, so perhaps a little review is in order.

Way back in April, a project was started (called Collaboration) to remove files and links from the database. This is something of a pain for the admins, since sometimes these files use formats that are difficult to maintain, or become a nuisance (such as a link that exists in lots of places that goes bad). The membership should become more involved in maintaining such data - and the wiki provides for this ability, since any member can edit virtually any page (or article, in wiki terms).

The name comes from the Collaboration link that exists in many places in the database. It usually contains links to the forums that support the entry, and one for the associated wiki article.

Let me stress this point - in no way is this going to impact the frequencies, talkgroups and other trunked system information that the web service uses to download. In addition, news items and miscellaneous system information is being maintained on the trunk system items. You can say, in general, that if the web service cannot handle the data, then it's being moved to the wiki.

One of the biggest sticking points seems to be Fire Tone Out information, or FTOs. To make it somewhat easier to find, a wiki category - a special function that gathers articles with a common theme - has been set up to capture this data, in alphabetic order. The various categories, along with other information, have been assembled on the Collaboration Gateway. This is accessible via the wiki pulldown - click on collaboration, and you will be taken to the gateway.

For a time, this data will be in flux - some of this data will still be on the database, some on the wiki. It's a huge undertaking, and this simply cannot be avoided. A first pass has been completed on 33 states, with 17 or so remaining. So put another way, if you don't find it on the database, check the wiki to see if the data has been moved.

73 Mike

[qlajlu]

Ya know what the problem is, doncha, Mike? Most of the members do not read all the forums. They read their state's forum and look at their state's Database. What happens outside that is foreign to them. Some of them don't even read their own state's forums but only access the Database when the their need arises. Look how many got caught with the change to the SOAP interface. So while your intention to educate the masses is honorable, you're preaching to the choir, as it were, by posting this information in this forum. They are just simply not listening (reading) and it will probably get worse until all the migration is done.

Wayne_H has the same problem with people posting in the wrong places. He talks to them like they have been following every forum so they know the difference. They don't. When they have a problem, they post anywhere that seems reasonable.

You Admin types need to look a little closer at this problem and Wayne needs to grow some patience or hold his tongue. Telling a person why his thread has been moved is a good tool, but to not say anything or to say, "This has been hashed to death," is not helpful. For that poster it was a first time encounter with the situation and the knee-jerk reaction is to post SOMEWHERE about it to get help. Doing a search is only employed by seasoned posters.

Bottom line: There is TONS of information on this Web site. Not EVERYONE knows about all of it, and some do not know about any of it. I would also venture to say that most do not know where to look for it either.

[/rant]

[Highpockets]

Maybe it's time for a RR Newsletter, with info by Lindsay, Mike and Wayne explaining some of these changes, at least the users who have it set to receive the Newsletter may read it! Maybe with a few pictures to show examples of things they may see. Just a thought...

[fmon]

Mike, I agree with Moe and Curly.

[ka3jjz]

As do I. However it's not a perfect solution, since not every member has elected to get the newsletter. At least here, those that scan with 'see only new posts' (and I know a lot of newcomers do exactly that) will see this thread and get some idea of what is occurring.

Right now, Lindsay is a firefighter with all the little glitches and other junk happening with the new infrastructure; hopefully he'll put a newsletter together shortly, as we haven't had one in quite some time. In fact, I think - I have to look - that the project has been mentioned in past newsletters, but perhaps not to any detail as to where the data is going - which is the key to this project.

73 Mike

[scannerfreak]

Originally Posted by ka3jjz

As do I. However it's not a perfect solution, since not every member has elected to get the newsletter. At least here, those that scan with 'see only new posts' (and I know a lot of newcomers do exactly that) will see this thread and get some idea of what is occurring.

73 Mike

I created a forum wide announcement with the text of your above post. Everyone should see it regardless of what forum they are in. Hopefully this will work for now

[ka3jjz]

Thanks. Appreciate the effort 73 Mike

[captclint]

Originally Posted by qlajlu

Bottom line: There is TONS of information on this Web site. Not EVERYONE knows about all of it, and some do not know about any of it. I would also venture to say that most do not know where to look for it either.[/rant]

I could not agree more. While the Wiki search fails to find stuff that I know is there, the problem of the month is "Collaboration". I was personally involved in creating a bunch of stuff for PA, but I really think we need to step back and look at what is needed, now that most of it is created.

If you read enough (the forum-wide announcement is good, but many just go to the DB), you may eventually get the idea of where to go for additional info. Wow! Additional Information. Now that just might tell people what the RESULT of the Collaboration is all about. Sure, it allows many people to collaborate on updating, but the average member (esp new members) are not interested in what it does. They want find Additional Info.

So I offer this suggestion that we either change the link name to Additional Information, or at least add these words to the Collaboration Link?

[AlabamaRS]

Originally Posted by qlajlu

Ya know what the problem is, doncha, Mike? Most of the members do not read all the forums. They read their state's forum and look at their state's Database. What happens outside that is foreign to them. Some of them don't even read their own state's forums but only access the Database when the their need arises. Look how many got caught with the change to the SOAP interface. So while your intention to educate the masses is honorable, you're preaching to the choir, as it were, by posting this information in this forum. They are just simply not listening (reading) and it will probably get worse until all the migration is done.

Wayne_H has the same problem with people posting in the wrong places. He talks to them like they have been following every forum so they know the difference. They don't. When they have a problem, they post anywhere that seems reasonable.

You Admin types need to look a little closer at this problem and Wayne needs to grow some patience or hold his tongue. Telling a person why his thread has been moved is a good tool, but to not say anything or to say, "This has been hashed to death," is not helpful. For that poster it was a first time encounter with the situation and the knee-jerk reaction is to post SOMEWHERE about it to get help. Doing a search is only employed by seasoned posters.

Bottom line: There is TONS of information on this Web site. Not EVERYONE knows about all of it, and some do not know about any of it. I would also venture to say that most do not know where to look for it either.

[/rant]

I hate to say this but dude you are 10000000000000000000000000000 per cent correct

[ka3jjz]

As do I - and I am guilty of using the 'hashed to death' phrase.

73 Mike

[aharry]

I natural and quick fix would be after deleting the existing links from the database create a single link to a) a landing page that describes the collabaration project or b) just a link to the collabaration page.

This would help people that automatically go looking for links but instead of finding nothing they are redirected to the info they need. A landing page would be ideal because it would make them aware that the link on the database page will be removed at some future date.

[ka3jjz]

If you click on the collaboration tab, the link to the corresponding wiki article is at the bottom. Yes, it's clunky, but that's what we got, and I'm sure Lindsay would give me a stern 'NO' to any more db changes.

Remember the Collaboration Gateway is immediately accessible via the wiki pulldown, which is right under the Scanner Master logo. There's a brief summary of the project, and a link to our guidelines, on that article. 73 Mike

[aharry]

Originally Posted by ka3jjz

If you click on the collaboration tab, the link to the corresponding wiki article is at the bottom. Yes, it's clunky, but that's what we got, and I'm sure Lindsay would give me a stern 'NO' to any more db changes.

Remember the Collaboration Gateway is immediately accessible via the wiki pulldown, which is right under the Scanner Master logo. There's a brief summary of the project, and a link to our guidelines, on that article. 73 Mike

Yes Mike, I know that and you know that.. but there a lot of people that do not yet know anything about what callboration is.. they are the ones that are bufuddled when the links are missing. My idea was not a database change.. it was the replacement (vs removal) of all links from the database with a single temporary link to a page that describes what is going on with collaboration. These links could finally be removed once it seemed all the "What's going on?" questions stop. This whole process seems rather backwords to me. While I enjoyed helping and enjoyed developing the scripts to help automate the process a little, it seems to me the whole thing could have been automated internally. By backwards I mean it was done manually by mostly people outside RR administration.. ie a couple of SQL queries on the database would have helped you.

[aharry]

Mike, I thought about deleting my previous post because I did not want it to be misconstrued by you. I know that most of the work was done by you personally. My comment was really about the others on the same side of the fence as you. Direct access to the database to determine were the links and files that needed to be moved were vs you accessing the database just like the rest of us from the web site. That is what made the process so time consuming.. manually loading hundreds of pages. I know you worked (and are still working) hard on the whole process and again it was a pleasure to help you however I could.

[ka3jjz]

I asked about firing off a few SQL queries to determine what we had in the database, and got a flat NO.
This really irks me because each time I open up a new level to be searched, it has to be done manually, and that makes it prone to errors. But to a large extent, once NC and the outstanding NY and Tenn. stuff is done, I think the worst of this phase will be behind us.

Unfortunately I'm going to run into this problem about using SQL to query the data again; another phase, yet to be done, will be to check each county and see if there are any businesses, attractions, and other categories associated at that level that need checking. But we have to clean up the agency and areawide stuff first.

Your scripts were absolutely critical to getting us moving as fast as we had. Without them we'd still be pretty much stuck as we were a few states ago (hi). For that, I for one thank you. 73 Mike