Has anyone made a family tree with the frequencies/manufacturers/technologies/protocols etc on it?
Is it even possible, or would there be too much confusion in the overlapping definitions?
Here’s an image to explain what I mean but don’t analyse it: I know that even this little scrap is full of mistakes.
It’s just a dodgy example.
4 Likes
I like it,
If you build on it, I’m sure there are a few branches you have already thought of in the HF Freqs, but just incase, dont forget the lonley little 134kHz with FDX-B ,Verichip etc
2 Likes
This will be an experiment…
Use that with https://draw.io to publicly manage the family tree. I will make changes when possible.
2 Likes
I can make a start on it and give it a skeleton. Then I could throw it open to the community to develop it where they want. I could host it on dropbox or elsewhere. I am reluctant to work on it on Google drive because it insists on linking it to a Google ID: I have been closing Google accounts because I don’t like how they tie everything together. There are parts of my life that I want to keep distinct from others and in the current corporate lack-of-boundaries culture they seem to be one of the worst offenders.
Have all transponder protocols been defined by ISO? I was thinking that the hierarchy could be:
Frequency
|
ISO
|
Protocol
Would that work?
Should there be a developer layer (NXP etc)?
2 Likes