>From what I have seen, the bigger providers start with 100. Smaller FTA broadcasters seomtimes don't even number their channels and are assigned 0. So for many of the channels, they just given the next free number paded with the sat angle number. For OTA ATSC channels, if you live in/near a major city or between 2 major citys, you will have a lot of channels and it is much nicer if you can use the channel number assigned. Must people refer to channels by the number and it is by the number that you select the channel. If someone says there is somthing coming on channel 9 and don't sue the same numbers, then you first have to figure out what channel 9 is, then find it in your number system. The channel number has been the most common way to refer to a local channel for decades. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alex Lasnier" <alex@xxxxxxxx> To: "VDR Mailing List" <vdr@xxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Friday, March 07, 2008 10:47 AM Subject: Re: sub channel numbering system > Timothy D. Lenz wrote: > > Would it be possible to add support for the subchannel numbering system used > > with ATSC? Exmple of the channels in our area: > > Since VDR needs to be patched for ATSC anyway, I'll consider adding > sub-channel support in the next ATSC patch. But my first impression is > that such a change will likely be very ugly and break many things... > > However, none of the North American satellite providers have channel > numbers lower than 50 (I think) so the easiest solution is to number > your ATSC channels from 1 to 49. Is it really that important that your > channel numbers match the broadcaster's? > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > vdr mailing list > vdr@xxxxxxxxxxx > http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr _______________________________________________ vdr mailing list vdr@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
