Talk:Specific Area Message Encoding

	Weather portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Weather, which collaborates on weather and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details. Articles Requested Project Resources Become a Member Project Talk Assessment A-Class Alerts WeatherWikipedia:WikiProject WeatherTemplate:WikiProject WeatherWeather articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the General meteorology task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Disaster management Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management 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.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Canada Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

SAME Sample Audio File Format[edit]

Can we have an article without all the .ogg files? Maybe something more widely used, like MP3 or .wav? -76.4.49.201 15:42, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see one OGG file, and no, MP3 is not an option, as it is a patented, unfree format. WAV is simply bloated. Almost all modern players can play OGG. --Golbez 17:33, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As of right now the file with the SAME sample message is WAV, 96000 sps 32-bit float. This high-quality lossless format is good for those who want to build or try out decoders. --75.145.68.90 (talk) 09:13, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the timing is slightly wrong on the sample file. The SAME standard picks an insane bit time that does not evenly divide normal digital audio sample rates. The example file is 96000 samples per second, which at 1.92ms per bit works out to 184.32 samples per bit. The creator of the sample file appears to have rounded this down to 184 samples per bit, leaving a timing error of about 1.5 parts per thousand. The sample message has 1000 characters, so 800 bits, so it gets off by a bit about halfway through if you go by perfect timing. This is an error that is likely to be found in the wild, though, for the same reason it is found here. The NOAA spec linked below limits timing deviation to about 1 part per thousand, but decoders probably need to cope with the slight mistimings anyhow. It would be best to recover the total preamble time and use it to adjust the forward timing, or perhaps just accurately identify phase error at bit starts. --75.145.68.90 (talk) 09:37, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I'm the one who generated the sample several years ago. I finally got around tk creating a new version of that file which should mitigate the timing issue somewhat and better conform to the standard. I'd be happy to hear ur thoughts! Askasel 💬Talk 📜Contributions 20:38, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is There A Decoder Program Availible?[edit]

I Get KSPS Spokane And I Live In Edmonton Alberta So I Wanted To See What The TTY Like Tones Are... --Offensiveandconfusing 0:10, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes , some site and SDR wiki

Also, I found a document that may be handy for editors that, unlike me, have the time to correctly edit things: NWS SAME Specifications --0w0 catt0s (talk) 21:52, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

-- Can somebody add a link here from the "Same" disambiguation page? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.25.240.225 (talk) 19:39, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious codes[edit]

Some codes are not in the NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE INSTRUCTION 10-1712 FEBRUARY 12, 2007, so they should not get an O2 label. Some of those dubious codes are in the Canada docs, but some are marked for future imple. Glrx (talk) 00:22, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Which ones? Last time I checked, they were all listed in the FCC EAS documents.Weatherstar4000 (talk) 02:57, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Marked dubious in article because they are O2 and not in NOAA spec. What are the citations for the FCC docs? Article only gives NOAA source and opaque EL to FCC journal entry. Glrx (talk) 16:55, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I went and checked the actual FCC order from 2002 and deleted anything that wasn't actually adopted. However, I do own a weather radio and some of the codes that I deleted (freeze warning, power outage statement, etc.) are listed in the "disable alerts" menu. IDK if this means the NWS decided to implement them on NWR regardless of the FCC or they just went ahead and specified for them to be programmed into weather radios before the final decision and then never changed it. I added a bit about this and a bit saying to discuss it on this page in my edit summary. Also added citations Weatherstar4000 (talk) 17:53, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I marked them as dubious because they weren't in NOAA. However, Canada does list some non-NOAA codes on its website. To me, the issue is one of authority. I'm happy to include non-NOAA SAME codes if there is reasonable authority. Glrx (talk) 20:34, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My main issue, though is that I'm in the US, and some of the dubious codes were listed in the "disable" menu on my weather radio. It's back home and I'm still away at college so I can't check which ones right now (I'll get back to it in about a month unless someone else with a 2003 or newer weather radio can check). The main question is why are they there if the FCC never adopted them? I'm not going to re-add any unless there's proof that NOAA is actually using these in opposition to FCC rules, which doesn't seem likely. Weatherstar4000 (talk) 21:25, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think we need to be careful about 'Americanizing' the SAME codes, since this is a system used in both the United States and Canada. Perhaps, if differences between implementations is an issue, we could consider if the 'Event codes' chart should have a couple columns added to indicate whether a particular code has been adopted by the U.S. or Canada. As you can see here, there are some codes not currently in use in Canada, that are in use in the United States. It may be better to indicate that in the chart with a seperate column. --Savant99 (talk) 00:11, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My intention wasn't to delete the codes that Canada uses but rather introduce a new type code (such as "Can1") for them (that points to the authority). It would be nice if there were a better source than the webpage. Also, I'm queasy about including "unimplemented" codes. Glrx (talk) 02:48, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would be easier to just have two columns for the 'type' code. A 'U.S.' column and a 'CAN' column. That way you can keep the M, O1, O2 codes, and add a distinct set of type codes for the Environment Canada implementation. Let's be honest here, the M, O1, O2 type codes are meaningless with respect to Environment Canada, since it references the FCC implementation which does not apply in Canada. For sake of the chart we can create a simple 'key'. Remember, there are no 'Canadian' SAME code receivers. The devices that are made are sold in both countries so they include all possible codes that could be issued by either country. For example, the 'BHW' code that is listed as "For Future Implementation" by Environment Canada is actually included in the list of codes recognised by the WR108 receiver. This is in spite of the fact that it is not listed in the event code chart. I don't see a problem with including these 'Future Implementation' codes so long as they are clearly identified as such. Clearly the receiver manufacturers have been given these codes, yet there is no referece to this on the page. More information is always better than less. --Savant99 (talk) 17:10, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm OK with that. Glrx (talk) 17:27, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Whew! OK, I finished the Event Code overhaul, and I'm pleased with it. The new revision should satisfy all sides. It includes the existing codes, as well as new codes that are part of the CEA standard but that are not currently implemented. I maintained the old key ('M', 'O1', 'O2') and grafted new keys onto it. For the most part the 'current' code section is dominated by U.S. codes, but there are 4 codes that are active in Canada that are not active in the United States. I have marked the codes as required to indicate as such so there will be no confusion. I've tried to be as through as possible here, let me know what you think. --Savant99 (talk) 03:10, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all your work. Everything looks reasonable. I'd go for a single table with all the codes, but others can voice their opinions about that. Glrx (talk) 18:15, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was considering a single table, but decided to break it up since it was very large already. It wouldn't be all that difficult to combine, but seeing as the other codes are specifically not in use (either they are 'internal use' and never seen, or are 'not implemented') I didn't see the value in including them in the main table. However, if others feel the same way as you do, it's easy enough to combine. The main thing is that the tables now include all codes, but identifies codes that are not 'active' and/or haven't been adopted. In this way we shouldn't run into issues of people deleting codes because they haven't been adopted by the FCC even though they are used by Environment Canada etc. Anyway, let's 'digest' it, and if anyone else feels a single table is better I'd be happy to merge it if it hasn't been done. --Savant99 (talk) 19:16, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Until further notice"?[edit]

I really don't see why a duration of "+0000" could not be construed as "for an indefinite period", with an event code of "Pnn" to indicate that the nnth indefinite alert is to be purged. -- Denelson 83 05:58, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Color Choices"[edit]

The colors used for Advisory and Watch can be indistinguishable to a red or green colorblind person (8% of the male population) One should either reduced in lightness or replaced with another color. I don't know if these are official colors. If no one else is willing, I will be happy to consult an online color picker to choose three colors usable to all forms of color deficiency.RMoribayashi (talk) 22:44, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead. Glrx (talk) 01:05, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

sub county codes?[edit]

According to the article "the first digit is zero if the entire county or area is included in the warning, otherwise, it is a non-zero number depending on the location of the emergency". Do these non-zero codes actually exist? Is there a way to find out what they are? Gjxj (talk) 17:51, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:52, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

1050Hz Tone.ogg (discussion)
Same.wav (discussion)

Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:37, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]