<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 9/7/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Phill Wiggin</b> <<a href="mailto:alamar@gmail.com">alamar@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>I understand, but as I mentioned earlier, MythTV is not SD. Were this<br>the SD list, I'd also see these discussions as a major concern. I<br>completely see what you mean, but discussing screen-scrapers in<br>general (and from alternative sources as well) shouldn't be taboo on
<br>this list (frankly, I don't think discussion of scraping Zap2it should<br>be taboo). The OP (as far as my mail-client shows) lists several<br>possibilities.<br><br>Regardless, I agree that Tribune could get their pants in a bunch if
<br>they start getting screen-scraped. But, that shouldn't stop the<br>discussion of alternatives to SD.<br><br>(As noted before, I'll be in the SD crowd and not using scrapers anyway.)</blockquote><div><br><br>I've been using MythTV for
3.5 years now. I remember quite well the times before zap2it labs. I don't paticularly recall much discussion about the operation of the scrapers on the list other than perhaps the occaisional "it's broken". I do recall that using the scrapers was considered a "necessary evil" because there was no other option at the time.
<br><br>MythTV used (and can still use) xmltv to import scraped listings. Any scraping solution would surely also use xmltv. If that's the case, shouldn't the discussion about their operation be on the xmltv list? Not only does it seem more appropriate but you would also benefit from the experience of the people writting in scrapers in just about every country other than those in north america.
<br><br>For me personally, I'm using SD. I didn't build a MythTV system just to save $5/month on a comcast DVR.<br></div><br></div>