On Thursday 16 June 2005 13:35, Manu Abraham wrote: > Andrew de Quincey wrote: > > On Thursday 16 June 2005 12:45, Johannes Stezenbach wrote: > >>On Thu, Jun 16, 2005 at 02:10:10PM +0400, Manu Abraham wrote: > >>>Is service_id supposed to be unique in a bouquet too ? or is it only in > >>>a transponder ? > >> > >>ETSI TR 101 211 says (4.1.1 Network Information Table (NIT) information): > >> > >>"The SI uses two labels related to the concept of a delivery system, > >>namely the network_id and the original_network_id. > >>The latter is intended to support the unique identification of a > >>service, contained in a TS, even if that TS has been > >>transferred to another delivery system than the delivery system where it > >>originated. A TS can be uniquely referenced > >>through the path original_network_id/transport_stream_id. > >>A service can be uniquely referenced through the path > >>original_network_id/transport_stream_id/service_id. The > >>network_id, thus, is not part of this path. > >> > >>In addition each service_id shall be unique within each > >>original_network_id. When a service (contained inside a TS) is > >>transferred to another delivery system, only the network_id changes, > >>whereas the original_network_id remains > >>unaffected." > >> > >>However, in practise you cannot rely on this. > > > > Is it worth supporting bouquets in the file formats do you think? None of > > the > > I think if we were to support Bouquets, the config would be become > larger, but we can have them cached in memory only rather than write out > to file .. ? What do you think ? Aren't bouquets roughly equivalent to preset channel groupings provided by the broadcaster? Maybe it would make sense to store them in the presets file format.
