DiscreteON/OFF phantom buttons in RDFs

Discussion forum for JP1 software tools currently in use, or being developed, such as IR, KM, RemoteMaster, and other misc apps/tools.

Moderator: Moderators

Should RDFs include phantoms, including DiscreteON/OFF phantoms?

No, no phantoms in RDFs, period.
0
No votes
Yes to phantoms, no to discretes.
7
50%
Yes to phantoms and discretes.
7
50%
 
Total votes: 14

tranx
Posts: 682
Joined: Sun May 13, 2012 4:53 am
Location: Hants, UK

Post by tranx »

mdavej wrote:We have what, 10,000 users at least and have taken a very unscientific poll of 12 of them so far. Not a good sample size. Besides, one of the founding fathers of JP1 and site owner should have veto power anyway (IOW, please stick around Rob).
Me too, and thanks for discussing it Rob because that has been helpful.
I think I now see that, when a function is mainly going to be used from a phantom,
(or in the case where a function is to be tucked away on an obscure normal button),
RMIR's facility for editing the function labels could already be useful, especially for a novice who might have been confused or not sure how to vote :?
(edited:)With function labels edited to show in brackets [where they are allocated]

e.g.
for function labels edited to go just on phantom buttons:
"DiscreteOn[for:phant#DiscreteOn]"
"Hdmi1[for:phant#11]"

For function labels edited to go just on obscure buttons:
"Hdmi1[for:Shift-Extra,Xshift-AV]"

- It may be some help to remember where obscure functions have been put,
but it remains to be seen how much use that will be...
pH7_jp1
Posts: 485
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2003 4:17 pm
Location: Sterling Heights, MI

Post by pH7_jp1 »

Rob, please don't let a little debate effect your fun. For some people, debating is "fun". :) I don't think anyone here is upset with anyone else - I know I am not. It has been great having you around again. I would much rather have the discussion go away and have everything remain as-is than to have you choose to not participate.
MrMoody
Posts: 189
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 1:11 pm
Location: NC,USA

Post by MrMoody »

I'm a little late to the debate because I don't check the forum frequently.

I voted to put the discretes in simply because it makes programming macros easier. However, I can see the point that it's a violation of the fundamental design, and like the rest of you I can deal with it myself, anyway.

I have a better solution although it's probably more trouble than it's worth.

What would be nice is for the macro view to show the effective function for each key, but this would require RMIR to keep track of the current effective device for each key (including external functions and keymoves) to build the display. For example, a macro could look like:
TV
Phantom1(Power on)
Shift-1(5sec)
Red(Hdmi1)
etc.

In other words make RMIR do the work of figuring out what function will be sent instead of having to do it manually. Then you could take all the discretes out of the RDFs. I'd volunteer for that, it wouldn't be too hard.

In any case, it's not a big deal to me, I can live with it like it is ...
URC-8820 x2, URC-10820N, Insignia NS-RC05A-11 x2, RCA RCRP05B, Potenza ST ADB, OARI06G, URC-7980, OARUSB04G, Nevo C2 x3, AOC 67100BA1-017-R, onn URC-3660, Insignia NS-RMTSNY17, IRWidget
Post Reply