rmeden wrote:... If it really doesn't exist (please try it), then it's a lineup issue we can pass to TMS.
johnsonsmythe wrote:Thanks for your input (and this isnt a personal reply) but it looks like you havent read or understood the problem either. Perhaps if someone who comments could actually look at the source data rather than pontificating about it that would help.
I can confirm the channel shouldnt exist on my box, the channel shouldnt be in the lineup but is, its a TMS error, but as I am paying Schedules Direct and not TMS then I am reporting it to Schedules Direct.
Whether I make money or not (which I am clearly not otherwise I wouldn't have wanted clarification on it in an earlier post, to clear this up I am NOT distributing something that I am using personally and therefore legitimately as part of the SD Agreement) then that is completely irrelevant to this post.
Again, I apologize for apparently misunderstanding your intentions; and I appreciate the civility of you reply.
But I did read your data. I did understand it. I'll agree I did not understand the problem, but IMO that's only because until your last post you didn't respond to Robert's question about whether the channel was real or not. OK, so the actual problem is that there's a channel in your lineup that isn't real. That is
a data problem, in the TMS data, and I quite agree you should report it to SD and not directly to TMS (I see that I seem to have suggested that, but that's not what I intended).
johnsonsmythe wrote:...Its fairly clear where the error is, whether the document says its optional or not, means it should be there sometimes, its is *never* there so it looks like a simple bug.
I clearly understand, and I understood earlier, that you are defining the problem as being, there is never a value in the "to" date in your channel lineup, and that's a bug in the software or an error in the data and it should be fixed. I was just disagreeing with you on that. This is a sprawling database and the data comes from a wide variety of feeds. I expect that to mean that "optional" data items are going to be found on an "as available" or "as economical to collect" basis. The schema is
a "contract" with software with respect to document structure, but not
a contract with the consumer to fill in all the fields.
But I guess I was not being entirely objective. I checked - there are no "to" dates in my lineup either. I don't care - I wouldn't use it anyway; but I have to allow that AFAIK there really could
be a simple bug somewhere, where they have the data but don't emit it into the output. I would, and do, support the suggestion that the server code should be checked to see if there is such a bug.
But if it's just that the data is sparse/absent, I would expect TMS to laugh at any suggestion that someone should go track down those "to" dates and put them in the database so that the data makes more sense to someone.
In any case, you really
should be able to proceed with your app - especially as it's really for your personal use, just go on the web page and deselect any channel that isn't real!
PS. I'm working hard to try to be clear and thorough. Sometimes that may make me a bit pedantic. I find the term "pontificating" quite offensive. But as I said, I do appreciate the civility of your reply.