[mythtv-users] Mooting architecture for a DataDirect replacement

Jay R. Ashworth jra at baylink.com
Fri Jun 22 19:33:34 UTC 2007


On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 03:01:37PM -0400, Rod Smith wrote:
> Some of this could dovetail in with the user-generated program description 
> database idea. If something like this were set up with a Web-based interface 
> using ads to offset the cost, it could be a way to fund the whole project. 
> Basically, I have in mind something similar to IMDB, including Web-accessible 
> TV listings, using user-contributed descriptions, with XMLTV downloadable 
> descriptions for those MythTV users without NNTP access. Perhaps links to 
> DVDs sold on Amazon using an Amazon Associates account could serve as as 
> another revenue source.

True.

> There might also be ways to entice TV stations to contribute listings -- 
> reverse links to the stations' own Web pages, or perhaps even to whatever 
> pages THEY use to most directly generate revenue, as a starting point.

As has been discussed, a) they already do it and b) they pay for the
privilege.

> I doubt if all this could be set up, and certainly not with complete 
> descriptions and data, in two months' time; but it could be started by then.

Yeah, there's that.

> > > - Depending on licensing terms, even if an individual station didn't
> > > want to provide the data directly, a station might not object to one
> > > person screen-scraping data from a Web site and providing it via the
> > > proposed Usenet architecture (or some other means, for that matter).
> >
> > Perhaps.  I can't see why a station would *not* want it's local viewers
> > to have the most accurate up-to-date data about what's scheduled.
> > Indeed: they might see fit to put data about promercials in their local
> > scheduler, which TMS might ignore... but if the data's coming direct
> > from the station, you'll get it.
> 
> I could see stations refusing just because they don't see what's in it for 
> themselves.

Sales failure.  ;-)

>                Even if we make it VERY easy by providing access to an NNTP 
> server and software that automatically uploads all the data, it'll take some 
> minimal amount of effort on their part to install the software and keep it 
> running. Some "suits" might not trust any software we'd provide, if such 
> software were necessary. If they don't see the benefit, they won't bother. 
> Providing reverse Web links, access to a user-generated description database, 
> etc., could be at least part of a package of enticements.

True.  But if the software comes from their automation provider...

> > > - An awful lot of what's broadcast is repeats, movies, etc. I wonder
> > > if some way of separating the schedule data from the program data
> > > would be desirable, or at least providing a community-run database
> > > of program data (similar to CDDB for CD data or IMDB).
> >
> > *This* is the hirsute part of the problem.  Optimally, you do want to
> > divorce PROGRAM data from AIRING data... but then someone has to
> > repository the PROGRAM data, and make sure everyone uses the same
> > (unique) primary key for each program -- which is still a weak spot
> > in the program distribution business as I understand it.
> 
> I agree it's a hairy problem. It seems to be a potentially important one to 
> tackle in the long term, though. With an open database of program data, we'd 
> need much less cooperation from TV stations to keep the MythTV schedulers 
> running.

You bet.  Luckily there are fewer program producers than stations, and
they have an even bigger incentive.

> In the short term, it's probably best to concentrate on standards to use NNTP 
> for data delivery and try to get individual TV stations (or somebody else) to 
> contribute the descriptions and other data, either directly to an NNTP server 
> or via a third party. If the descriptions can be separated out, though, 
> having an independent and open database could minimize future problems should 
> somebody get obnoxious about redistribution of descriptions they've written.

Sure.

> > Sure.  But that's infrastructural.  And it's *standardized*
> > infrastructure, so you *can* "just grab a feed from anywhere".  The
> > trick is to pre-process and pre-structure the feed *just enough* to
> > make that workable, based on the smarts of the servers and the
> > abilities of the clients -- I'm mooting more than just Myth as a
> > target, obviously.
> 
> Indeed. If this idea were to be done right, anybody could use it, potentially 
> even including TiVo or other commercial entities.

Yep.

> > This is the level of conversation I've been hoping for on this idea,
> > Rod; thanks for climbing on.
> 
> Sure. Your idea has a lot of merit. I believe it'll take more thinking and 
> discussion to figure out all the implications and potential applications, as 
> well as the limitations.

That was nicely put.  :-)

Cheers,
-- jr 'all the answers?  Me??' a
-- 
Jay R. Ashworth                   Baylink                      jra at baylink.com
Designer                     The Things I Think                       RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates     http://baylink.pitas.com                     '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA      http://photo.imageinc.us             +1 727 647 1274


More information about the mythtv-users mailing list