DB Submission Proposal...

[lbfd09]

This is out of the box. But in an effort to reduce the time and effort, to input and correct data, and to reduce time for the unpaid admins, I am putting forth this proposal for consideration with the next major upgrade to the site. I am taking this idea form other sites that have similar user input and where we have found how redundant it is to even copy and paste a contributors input (if not retyping it) to the proper field and sections of where they are sending it.

I suggest that the user's submissions be in form format, with the same fields that the data base has. A blank form for new submissions or additions, a current data in the form for corrections and updates or for deletion of obsolete data, In addition there should be a comments box to invite comments for why the submission. Of course the note or additional comments boxes like are there now should be kept.

Yes, I know this is not something that can or even would be accomplished overnight. But think of the ease it would make of an admin's job. One might even be able to add hooks to new data base record fields that could bring back listings of statewide of national frequencies that can be managed in their area yet have the ability of placement in a local area's listing.

 

[K9DAK]

Sounds like a great idea! That also might facilitate better descriptions of changes when they're made.

 

[mibzzer15]

+1 good idea

 

[GTR8000]

That idea has already been kicked around for some time behind the scenes, as well as other ideas to promote better submissions. I believe the idea of allowing end-users to directly edit the existing data, which would then go to a queue for a DB Admin to either approve or reject, has been kicked around also. Kind of like the way end-users were at one time allowed to add Function Tags when they were first introduced to the DB, for those who remember that. That being said, there do not appear to be any immediate plans to implement any of those ideas.

As for nationwide/statewide data showing up on the county level, that's a whole other can of worms separate from the submission issue. I can't speak for Lindsay or Eric, but my gut feeling is that there are no immediate plans to mirror any nationwide/statewide data on the county pages.

 

[ericcarlson]

As already noted, this is a potential feature that we have already placed under consideration. However, I have no timeline for when/if this would be implemented and the implementation of such a feature is at Lindsay's discretion.

 

[lowboy654]

I think on the surface this is a good plan. for me the copy and paste thing is no big deal on my end. but I think we need to keep it just like the same screen we look at "AKA" all of the same Fields, let the submitter use the same kind of screen we do and then we look it over and give it thumbs up or down, fix what we don't like. that could be a great plan.

 

[scannerman5555]

how about putting on top of the counties pagers what was updated on that page !

 

[W6KRU]

how about putting on top of the counties pagers what was updated on that page !

It's already there. Hover your mouse over the date that follows"Last updated" on the upper right of the county page. If you click on the date, you get a longer list.

 

[b52hbuff]

I suggest that the user's submissions be in form format, with the same fields that the data base has. A blank form for new submissions or additions, a current data in the form for corrections and updates or for deletion of obsolete data, In addition there should be a comments box to invite comments for why the submission. Of course the note or additional comments boxes like are there now should be kept.

At the risk of killing the proposal, let me support it.

It is common to see calls for patience during the submittal process, and the reason is typically the workload and volunteer status of the DB Admins. If this (or other) proposal could help reduce DB Admin workload, then I support it.

In the software world, it is often seductive and entertaining to propose solutions to perceived problems. Since each of us have different perceptions of how the DB works, users might not see the big picture and know what changes result in the best bang for the buck...

Having said that, I'd love to hear from Lindsay and Eric the issues and challenges of supporting the current database, and what they think are the pressing issues to address?

 

[lbfd09]

I am going to purposely leave out the security, back-up, and redundancy issues and tasks that need to be accomplished for this to work. Just imagine that those would be at least a two times of what they are now.

I see that one could basically take the existing data base table (what ever it looks like) and massage it for a new data table with the addition of a few new fields (some for now some for the future). Add some additional data tables that can be used to verify TPLs, DPLs, and test NACs. Having some rules, tests, or look ups for the, frequencies can help catch errors and omissions. Dealing with the frequencies might be more of a challenge, but isn't that why data base builders get paid so well?

Yes, to my fellow users this may be a little slower than the present method of cutting and pasting the data into the submission box. But then on the other hand it can help to make more accurate data. It should also make the job of the DB-Admins more of administrator and not data entry experts.

I'll shut up now. As I thank those supporting this, I guess not so new idea.

 

[exportdawg]

I feel sorry for the DB Admin that's going to upload the ones I just submitted for Orange County FL's new P25 system. I think I submitted about 20-30 New TG's. Wish I could make it easier on you guys.

 

[GTR8000]

In all honesty, it really won't matter how fancy the submission process is, we'll still get plenty of less than ideal submissions. Having such a rigidly structured input format may even turn some submitters off to the whole process, including people who would ordinarily submit good data. People are comfortable with copy/paste, they are not going to want to sit in front of their computer for 30 minutes typing individual entries into form fields.

As a dbadmin, I have no problem doing my end of the process and making the best of the data that is submitted, regardless of the format. Sure, I prefer submissions that are easy for me to work with, but in the end, good data is good data.

Another thing some of you may not be aware of is that we have tools we can use to import multiple conventional frequencies and trunked talkgroups in one shot. So if you are going to copy/paste a list of frequencies or talkgroups, you should try to format it the way it looks on the database pages. That makes it easier for us to map out the fields when importing. It's also important to leave more than 2 spaces between each field, but not to use more than 1 space for things like alpha tag and descriptions.

The wiki has some examples of ideal submissions. I encourage all submitters to take a look at it.

RR Database Submission Guidelines

Ideal Submission


I also encourage you guys to download and read the latest version of the DB Admin Handbook so you can get a much more detailed look "behind the scenes" at how the DB works, and what guidelines we use for processing data.

Database Administrator Handbook

 

[hfxChris]

In all honesty, it really won't matter how fancy the submission process is, we'll still get plenty of less than ideal submissions. Having such a rigidly structured input format may even turn some submitters off to the whole process, including people who would ordinarily submit good data. People are comfortable with copy/paste, they are not going to want to sit in front of their computer for 30 minutes typing individual entries into form fields.

That's my thought too. Speaking strictly for myself and not any other db admin, I would rather see 'less than idea' submissions and then clean it up myself, rather than potentially intimidating away submissions. The more data we can get coming into the database from users the better, and the best way to keep the information coming is to make it as easy as possible.

 

[b52hbuff]

I would rather see 'less than idea' submissions and then clean it up myself, rather than potentially intimidating away submissions. The more data we can get coming into the database from users the better, and the best way to keep the information coming is to make it as easy as possible.

The data submission process doesn't need to be an either/or proposition.

In California, the toll roads and bridges have an option for FastTrack. It is an RFID system that allows users to prepay and drive through toll booths quicker. You still have the option to pay in cash.
FasTrak® - Keeping the Bay Area Moving

A similar dual tiered system could be applied to submissions. If you create a fully filled out submission that somply requires review from DB Admin, then the entry is 'fast tracked' into the database. If you provide a free form entry, it may take more time to enter. No valid submission is rejected...

Of course DB Admins will still be able to apply their personal biases based upon their understanding of the importance of the submission, etc...

But I'm just hypothesizing, since we don't really know the cost/benefit of this feature relative to other features being considered.

 

[GTR8000]

But I'm just hypothesizing, since we don't really know the cost/benefit of this feature relative to other features being considered.

You're hypothesizing because you're not an admin, therefore you're not privy to what goes on behind the scenes. That's a factual statement, it's not meant to be arrogant or dismissive. It's just something you should keep in mind before making statements about how the RRDB works or what the role of the admin entails.

I know for a fact that Lindsay is open minded when it comes to this stuff, and considers all ideas...but that doesn't mean they will get implemented, no matter how good the rest of us might think they are (or how many posts we make pushing the same idea). The RRDB is a complex machine where even a seemingly "minor" change can have far reaching impacts that need to be carefully considered. Sometimes things are not as simple as they appear on the surface.

As I've already said, and Eric has confirmed, this idea has already been discussed in the past. I'm quite certain Lindsay is fully capable of realizing that any given idea doesn't have to be either/or, and can figure out what the cost/benefit is. My personal take on it is that he thus far has not seen this particular idea as having great benefits vs the cost of implementing it.