Talk:Real-time locating system

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Technology (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 

Merge[edit]

How many more pages of this contents are possible? Real-time with dash, real time without dash, locating as gerund, location as noun. Could it be possible to integrate the contents to the page that sticks with the stardardized term "real time locating systems". Please start work. Thank you Niemeyerstein 2008-03-25 15:00

If there is no admin coming with the balls to perform the merger or at least to remove the doublette, this page will last forever Wireless friend (talk) 07:51, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Who with the social level of administrators has the competence to decide upon a merger and will take into account that RTLS is not determined in free spinning definitions, but in ISO standard 19762-5? What is described in this early approach to encyclopaedic work mixes the topic of locating with some architectural issues, some technical implementations and some personal reflections. I cannot see how to support a merger with my personal access rights to administer this text. Would please someone take the courage to clarify?Wireless friend (talk) 15:11, 9 September 2008 (UTC) that's right —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.77.227.30 (talk) 16:07, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

The merger proposal obviuosly is not adopted by anybody since 6 months. Hence the tag was deleted.Wireless friend (talk) 16:40, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
I added a merge tag to this article and to Real-time locating, then noticed this discussion here. I'll take a crack at merging these two articles later today. I'll clean up the redirects as well. (Redirects are cheap.) And however the often semi-illiterate technical community (to which I belong) might spell the term, proper English demands "real-time locating systems", to distinguish "locating systems that operate real-time" from the idea of "time-locating systems that are real" rather than proposed, perhaps. The point of hyphenating ambiguous groups of adjectives is to avoid bringing the non-expert who's reading to a screeching halt while they try to sort out the grouping from context. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 14:32, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
I support a merge of the two pages. Pro crast in a tor (talk) 10:30, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Merger proposal deleted again: The merging of the complex basics with adjacent technical implementation examples will not levy the complexity problem. However such merger would drive the volume beyond limits. After 18 months without contribution I respond with just deleting these tags and including additional explanations. As all terms refer to basic geometry it should be possible to look up enlightening details under the referred lemmata. Hende reading additional stuff is recommended, but no acadcemic qualification is required.Wireless friend (talk) 15:10, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Impenetrable prose[edit]

All these articles read a bit like a machine translation off someone's Web site. Is it possible to salvage this, or just toss it all overboard and start from first principles? --Wtshymanski (talk) 19:00, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes. improvement is possible. What about active contributions from a native speaker with this idea?Wireless friend (talk) 08:26, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Merge Indoor positioning system (IPS) into this lemma[edit]

The IPS article provides a lot of interesting references to offered systems designs and refers to various solutions offered in the market. However, this IPS article dilutes precision of explanations with rather amateurish descriptions, neglecting simple mathematical and physical challenges.Wireless friend (talk) 08:15, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Merge Local positioning system (LPS) into this lemma[edit]

The LPS article provides a set of interesting descriptions on mathematical approaches and some references to offered systems designs offered in the market. However, this LPS article dilutes precision of explanations with rather amateurish descriptions, neglecting simple mathematical and physical challenges.Wireless friend (talk) 08:15, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

I strongly disagree with this merge suggestion since a local position system such as Decca has a range of tens to hundreds of kilometers, and would not be considered an RTLS. Since this suggestion was made over a year ago, I'm removing the suggestion from the LPS page. Pro crast in a tor (talk) 05:29, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Merge Radiolocation into this lemma[edit]

The Radiolocation article provides some basic descriptions on physics based approaches. Merging could strengthen the focus on wireless solutions.Wireless friend (talk) 08:36, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Merge Locating engine into this lemma[edit]

The Locating engine article provides some basic descriptions on physics based approaches. Merging could strengthen the focus on wireless solutions.Wireless friend (talk) 08:39, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Major Reworking of article[edit]

I've taken a stab at a major rewrite, trying to help out a few previous editors that didn't appear to be native speakers of English. Mostly it was just copyediting, though I did make a few major changes: 1) consistently referring to RTLS nodes as "tags", as seems the norm in commercial usage these days, though academic articles tend to use the term "node". I figure that readers new to the topic would have an easier time understanding "tag". 2) I removed the "Locating in absolute coordinates" section as it also seemed to be referring to relative coordinates (like TDOA) 3) the "Locating in contiguity" section was also removed. Though the topic could be included in the article, the topic is very advanced, and the article seemed better with these two tortured paragraphs removed than included. I'm sure I've added a few copy mistakes, but on the whole, I believe it is much improved. Pro crast in a tor (talk) 08:12, 2 September 2012 (UTC)