Attention California Database Admins...

[b52hbuff]

I sent the note below as a PM to the two database admins for Santa Clara County. I would like to expand the audience and ask some more questions.

The executive summary is that the way many California counties have their database setup does not create an intuitive hierarchy in the Uniden Homepatrol software. The issue is that many subcategories are setup per-function and not per jurisdiction. There is a 'subsection' per city that isn't recognized by HP-1 software. And then the subcategory is simply 'Fire', "Police, etc. The result is that the subcategory is not useful, since it is listed as "Police" and you have no idea what police is being referenced.

I have seen other counties, and their subcategories are jurisdictional. So you have "Los Altos, City of" and then under this, you have Police, Fire, etc. The subcategory now shows the proper jurisdiction.

I'll upload a screenshot of Santa Clara County so you can see the issue. And then you can poke around to the other database pages to see how it is done 'correctly'.

Thanks for your time!

1. As I poke around other counties, I see similar issues. Just a few to point out, and these are just counties I visit, not to pick on folks:
Kern:
Kern County, California (CA) Scanner Frequencies and Radio Frequency Reference

Ventura:
Ventura County, California (CA) Scanner Frequencies and Radio Frequency Reference

Santa Barbera:
Santa Barbara County, California (CA) Scanner Frequencies and Radio Frequency Reference

2. The other question, is what is the most productive way to advise folks to update their sections? Is this message good enough? Should I submit information like other information? It seemed a bit out of place for a basic/wide sweeping change.

Anyway, not trying to cause trouble, just trying to help make the HP-1 the best it can be!

I apologize for the vague title, but I've never been as interested in the rr.com database until now. I'm sort of working 'backwards' so please bear with me. I fired up the HP-1 Sentinel software to see how Santa Clara county was represented, and it shows:
California \ Santa Clara \ County Systems \
...and then
... \ City Services (*13)
... \ Police (*~10)

I think the problem is the way subcategories have been used. All of the subcategories are 'City Services', 'Police', etc.
Here is the link to Santa Clara County:
Santa Clara County, California (CA) Scanner Frequencies and Radio Frequency Reference

If you take a look at Riverside county:
Riverside County, California (CA) Scanner Frequencies and Radio Frequency Reference

...you'll see that the subcategories are more descriptive "Banning, City of". It really helps in the hierarchy display of information.

So let's take Campbell as an example.In the blue subheading line, it shows Campbell, City of. This information isn't used by HP-1. And then the clickable link just below says "Police". I think it should be "Campbell, City of". Then under this subcategory, we need to put all of the Campbell frequencies for PD and PW.

Like I said, if it isn't clear, check out:
Riverside County, California (CA) Scanner Frequencies and Radio Frequency Reference

Look at the City of Hemet as an example.

 

[kma371]

Additionally, the program FreeScan views the DB the same when importing.

 

[Kirk]

I use FreeScan, but don't plan on purchasing a HomePatrol (looks cool, but funds are tight these days). Having experienced the import issues, and knowing that they use the same standard, I'll strive to start changing things to conform to this standard. I've gotta say, though, it's not going to be a fast process to cover this big state of ours.

 

[b52hbuff]

I use FreeScan, but don't plan on purchasing a HomePatrol (looks cool, but funds are tight these days). Having experienced the import issues, and knowing that they use the same standard, I'll strive to start changing things to conform to this standard. I've gotta say, though, it's not going to be a fast process to cover this big state of ours.

Thanks. I'll try to help out by submitting information. I really want the HP-1 to be a great travel scanner throughout CA.

 

[benca]

Database structure Sonoma County

I find the same problem when I look at Sonoma County, the web page is good but when Freescan brings back 7 groups titled Public Safety missing the City description makes the direct import pointless, since I have to copy everything to excel and rename the structure..... I'm sure there is a DB file structure that the software developers are following perhaps some data is not formatted in the same way.

 

[benca]

Placer County db

Placer County has the same type of importing issue.. web page display is very clear but the Freescan import does not seem to follow the data hierarchy used.

 

[b52hbuff]

Placer County has the same type of importing issue.. web page display is very clear but the Freescan import does not seem to follow the data hierarchy used.

Right, the programs pick up the subcategory tags.

 

[W6KRU]

This problem is all over the place. I raised this issue concerning the listing of the USFS back in July and was told it was a Freescan issue. Assaf didn't object much when I presented it to him as a Freescan issue and said that he might be able to do something in Freescan.

If I do a conventional freq. web import for Placer County in Win500, The categories and sub-categories display correctly in the import window.

e.g.
Cat: Lincoln, City of
Sub-Cat: Police
Sub-Cat: Services
Sub-Cat: Fire/EMS

Will fixing this for Freescan and Sentinel screw up the formatting in Win500? ???????

 

[W6KRU]

A little more poking around reveals that there are two ways of doing things. One method shows:

County systems
Cities This is a heading in a blue bar in the web display and is missing in the second
City 1 method shown below.
City 2
Etc.

The other method shows:

County systems
City 1
City 2
Etc.

Sonoma, Ventura, Santa Clara and Placer counties use the second method and need to be changed. The Cities heading that I bolded above is missing.

A quick look around at Utah and Arizona shows that the second method is heavily used there and needs to be corrected as well?

A standard method needs to be established and instituted throughout the database.

 

[b52hbuff]

A little more poking around reveals that there are two ways of doing things. One method shows:

County systems
Cities This is a heading in a blue bar in the web display and is missing in the second
City 1 method shown below.
City 2
Etc.

The other method shows:

County systems
City 1
City 2
Etc.

Sonoma, Ventura, Santa Clara and Placer counties use the second method and need to be changed. The Cities heading that I bolded above is missing.

We need better nouns.

If you look back at the Placer county example earlier as a thread, it shows blue bars as city dividers. Then within the divider are the subcategories of 'Police', 'Fire', and 'Public Works'. I don't have experience with other software programs, but from looking at the results of the HP-1 it would appear that whatever is in the blue bar is ignored.

The important factor is the subcategory is used as part of the database import.

So I think it is how the subcategory is used and not how the database is sorted is the important issue to a user friendly import into the HP-1.

What would be very useful at this point is to hear from the software vendors to understand how the database fields are mapped to the fields withing their programs.

 

[Kirk]

If someone with an HP-1 will be around this weekend, I'll make some adjustments on either San Luis Obispo or Santa Barbara county to see if I'm understanding how it needs to look. I'll can verify that it looks good in Freescan, but the hope here is that it'll look good in both Freescan AND HP-1.

 

[Duster]

If someone with an HP-1 will be around this weekend, I'll make some adjustments on either San Luis Obispo or Santa Barbara county to see if I'm understanding how it needs to look. I'll can verify that it looks good in Freescan, but the hope here is that it'll look good in both Freescan AND HP-1.

+1. If we can come up with a GOOD methodology to satisfy all the requirements, we can start adjusting the database. Although, I have to admit, I spent a lot of time and effort when I started as an Admin cleaning and organizing the Placer and surrounding counties' entries!! LOL

 

[Kirk]

To clarify, if there's someone who has an HP-1 and who ALSO uses Freescan to program 396/996 type scanners, that'd be the most useful type of beta tester for what I'm going to try on a small scale with a few California counties. I can't structure the data for one particular type of device or software, but I'm really hoping that they both will benefit from a singular uniform structure.

Also, if you have an example in the CA database of a county where it works well on both the HP-1 and Freescan (is that Riverside?), please provide that. Or of a county where it works for one but not the other.

Thanks.

Oh, and quit making me want an HP-1. You're going to get me in trouble with my wife.

 

[b52hbuff]

To clarify, if there's someone who has an HP-1 and who ALSO uses Freescan to program 396/996 type scanners, that'd be the most useful type of beta tester for what I'm going to try on a small scale with a few California counties. I can't structure the data for one particular type of device or software, but I'm really hoping that they both will benefit from a singular uniform structure.

Also, if you have an example in the CA database of a county where it works well on both the HP-1 and Freescan (is that Riverside?), please provide that. Or of a county where it works for one but not the other.

Oh, and quit making me want an HP-1. You're going to get me in trouble with my wife.

I'm not an HP-1 user, but I've started playing around with the software used to program it. The database in the program and in the HP-1 are derived from the current rr.com db and therefore these databases reflect the organization and tagging of the rr.com db.

Here is a link to the software:
http://info.uniden.com/twiki/pub/HomePatrol/WebHome/HomePatrol_Sentinel_1_00_07.zip

Download, install and start select the California counties. You can see in this thread how confusing Santa Clara county is when seen through the HP-1 db.

When you run it, the left pane looks like a Windows (File) Explorer directory tree. Click on: USA | California | Santa Clara | County Systems | Santa Clara.

...at this lowest level in the db hierarchy, you see how the current tagging/organization effects Santa Clara county. According to this note:
Re:FM Analog vs/ P25 Digital vs/ Other vs/ Mixed Mode - HomePatrol Discussion Forums
..Uniden starts their weekly processing run at 5pm on Sunday. After they update, you can click on 'Update' in the HomePatrol Sentinel software program. You'll download a new copy of the database and can see how your updates were reflected in the program.

Riverside is a good example, but it also has a quirk (imho). You access via similar path as above and then Riverside | County Systems | Riverside. The 2nd Riverside seems redundant. Other nodes at the same level as the 2nd Riverside are 'Airports', 'Hospitals', 'Hotels'.

So what the 2nd 'Riverside' actually means is 'Municipal Systems'. Then everthing under 'County System' is really a type of radio system. If I look at the Database guide:
http://wiki.radioreference.com/imag...e.com_Database_Administrator_Handbook_1.3.pdf

....what I'm calling 'Municipal Systems', is really 'Public Safety' Focus you're attention on 6.2.3.

I think what makes more sense is to have a layout that ultimately boils down to:
Riverside | County Systems | Riverside <--- sheriff and all county stuff goes here
Riverside | County Systems | Banning, City of
Riverside | County Systems | Beaumont, City of
....

Comments and discussion welcome.

I think we should all agree to the outcome and then we can worry about the database format. Nothing worse than to have battleing admins. Or pick out a change and find out we missed the mark. I'm happy to bring in UPman, Lindsay or anyone else to make sure we do this the right way the first time out.

I guess it goes without saying, we should pick one county, and then use it as a template. I'm not particular, but I think that Riverside (just one I found at random) is pretty close to what I think we're trying to achieve...

 

[b52hbuff]

A couple of more points on a followup. First is that Harris County Texas is listed in the db admin guide as a reference for how db pages should be laid out. And I have to admit that looking at it from the HP-1 HomePatrol Sentinel, it looks very user friendly. I'm make the following changes under Harris | County Systems | Harris | Police, I'd change the the subcategory tag to 'Houston, City of'.

...then organize the PD, FD and Services as they are organized for the smaller towns.

 

[UPMan]

For conventional stuff tied to a county, HP-1 maps:

County = System (Line 1)
Category = Ignored
SubCategory = Department (Line 2)
Channel = Channel (Line 3)

Trunked is a bit more straightforward:

System Name = System (Line 1)
Talk Group Category = Department (Line 2)
Channel = Channel (Line 3)

In all cases, HP-1 uses the "Description" field, (not the Alpha Tag field) for channel info.

I believe most of the 3rd party software for DMA (and other) scanners do basically the same thing. The only disconnect will be that HP-1 can have as many departments as you want, while DMA are limited to 20. But, in reality, some counties have more than 20 municipalities...the database should reflect that. DMA scanner software could be modified relatively easily (I'm sure Bob, Assaf, Gommert, Jim, and others appreciate how glibly I charactarize the effort) to accomodate more than 20 by either allowing the user to "tie" subcats together or by splitting >20 subcat counties into seperate systems upon import.

 

[UPMan]

I should also note that while Sunday night is our standard run, I have been doing frequent "special" runs. A new dB issued this morning. I'll do another pull tonight for tomorrow morning. They become available around 9 AM the morning after I start a database pull (the process takes 10-14 hours to complete).

 

[kma371]

Don't know if this looks better (it was certainly easier to edit, than creating new catagories) but check out Tuolumne Co

Tuolumne County, California (CA) Scanner Frequencies and Radio Frequency Reference

FreeScan "see's" the difference and doesn't just list "Police"

This might be a better fix...

 

[b52hbuff]

Thanks for your prompt response. Let's see what UPman thinks this is going to do... And let's see what it looks like in the Sentinel before you make big changes.

If we're comparing to Riverside, take a look at the City of Hemet. If you look at the HPS software, you can see that the entire city is grouped as one entity. Then inside the entity is a 'Service Type' entity that allows filtering.

So with Tuolome County, we don't have a city entry that has a trio of FD, PD and PW to see how this will play out.

But I do think that your update will address the nameless 'Fire/EMS', and 'Police' fields.

 

[wise871]

I see some of the state admin&#8217;s are trying to straighten things out when it comes to the database and UPMan is pushing out updates like there is no tomorrow but my question is has there been any guidance from the RR higher-ups? I&#8217;m sure some of them have tested or own the HP-1. This method of fixing while you go will just make the process twice as long. Wouldn&#8217;t it make since to pick one large county and one small county and make adjustments as needed and see how it works out? In the handbook they had template references to go by before the HP-1 came out. Will there be an updated to the handbook to reflect current and future configurations? I can&#8217;t see how all of this is a surprise when the HP-1 was beta tested for awhile.

I also agree that the long winded channel descriptions need to be cleaned up. The channel section should be direct and to the point. Any additional information can go in the Wiki section. I figured something will be addressed soon and guidance will be addressed. Remember, before the HP-1 was released, we used the database to get us started and save us time in typing everything in our radios. Like many of you I have ALWAYS tweaked or customized my alpha tags once I downloaded them to fit a more realistic description of who I was monitoring. With the HP-1 for now, we are unable to do so and have to rely solely on the database as is or until a third party developer comes up with a program.