bezking
Member
Wayne- In my case I knew which option I wanted, but I clicked the wrong one.
Help us progress the service tagging of frequency and talkgroup data
- Thread starter blantonl
- Start date
- Status
Highpockets
Member
AlabamaRS said:some1 point me to a page that has been done, will get some ideas
http://www.radioreference.com/apps/db/?ctid=1785
Highpockets
Member
AlabamaRS said:Thanks Steve, will look & see what I can learn
We are all learning, this is all new to us, just think, taking responsibility into your own hands.
I would think law talk would cover that.res6cue_dot_com said:
People, please read all the posts in this thread before asking a question. Thanks.
sdetermann
Member
I haven't posted much on RR but personally I think this is going to cause problems. In the St. Charles County MO database I've already noticed where someone has tagged fire operational (i.e. tactical) channels as dispatch. The same holds true for the St. Louis County MO database. Just my two cents.
caffman263
Member
What would you tag a Police Dept. Data request channel as? Such as when the officer calls on this channel/ tg to run your license and registration, or check for warrants.
Think about it, is it a dispatch item or a Tac "SWAT" ETC..... item or just Law talk? The guide lines are very simple here folks the Admins have talked about this for a while, here are the guide lines if you think about it everything fits just fine within the gudie lines. http://wiki.radioreference.com/index.php/Tagscaffman263 said:
If your not sure what the Tag should be then just dont Tag it, it's that simple if your not sure dont do anything.
Last edited:
caffman263
Member
lowboy654 said:
That's what I'm not sure about, it doesn't seem to fit in any of those three, which is why I left that one blank. It was kinda bothering me though, not being able to fit it in..
It's not officers being dispatched, it's the officers calling the dispatch center to run NCIC, etc
This one seems closest to me, just wanted another opinion before committing the DB to it, since it doesn't expressly fall into the cited examples
Again, not really any of those specifics.. Of course, if someone tags it wrong the admins can always override, but I think the point of this is to make it so they don't have to.
Law talk.caffman263 said:That's what I'm not sure about, it doesn't seem to fit in any of those three, which is why I left that one blank. It was kinda bothering me though, not being able to fit it in..
It's not officers being dispatched, it's the officers calling the dispatch center to run NCIC, etc
This one seems closest to me, just wanted another opinion before committing the DB to it, since it doesn't expressly fall into the cited examples
Again, not really any of those specifics.. Of course, if someone tags it wrong the admins can always override, but I think the point of this is to make it so they don't have to.
caffman263
Member
lowboy654 said:
Yeah, I guess that one fits closest. Thanks,
FreqOfNature
Member
Is there some logic behind only sub-categorizing fire, ems, and law enforcement into dispatch, tac, and talk and other categorizes like rail road, aircraft, federal, and the rest don't have sub-categorizes?
Just my humble observation, but I think it would make more sence to have simple law, ems, and fire as catagories and if more granular information is needed, have a seperate field for those sub-categories. Much of this information is already included in the data, i.e. A record listed as mobile is going to be a talk channel and if it's listed as a repeater then it is going to be a dispatch or command channel.
Tracy
www.freqofnature.com
Just my humble observation, but I think it would make more sence to have simple law, ems, and fire as catagories and if more granular information is needed, have a seperate field for those sub-categories. Much of this information is already included in the data, i.e. A record listed as mobile is going to be a talk channel and if it's listed as a repeater then it is going to be a dispatch or command channel.
Tracy
www.freqofnature.com
Tracy,
The purpose of the tags are to group what people typically want to listen to. Typical is not you and I, it is the general public and overall scanning community as a whole.
Certainly in rural areas there are dispatch frequencies that are being used without repeaters, and in metro areas there are talk and tac channels that do have repeaters.
Folks, I appreciate the discussion and feedback, but we are on the right track and the tags are functioning as intended.
The purpose of the tags are to group what people typically want to listen to. Typical is not you and I, it is the general public and overall scanning community as a whole.
Certainly in rural areas there are dispatch frequencies that are being used without repeaters, and in metro areas there are talk and tac channels that do have repeaters.
Folks, I appreciate the discussion and feedback, but we are on the right track and the tags are functioning as intended.
Last edited:
what if its been tagged already but the tag is poorely named, can it be re-tagged better?
ie: 09072 DPCVRTNO to: 09072 "DPD-CVRT-N" (minus quotations) I understand this would double or triple the work of the DB Admins thus I ask here before attempting later.
ie: 09072 DPCVRTNO to: 09072 "DPD-CVRT-N" (minus quotations) I understand this would double or triple the work of the DB Admins thus I ask here before attempting later.
What if the description and the tag will be the same, say public works, do we still enter the same info for the tag?
I find the info on some descriptions can be changed to better suit the frequency, but I guess we can't do that.
Take care
I find the info on some descriptions can be changed to better suit the frequency, but I guess we can't do that.
Take care
bezking said:
I just did the same thing with 5 frequencies when my cat jumped on my keyboard...
- Status