HomeGroupsTalkZeitgeist
This site uses cookies to deliver our services, improve performance, for analytics, and (if not signed in) for advertising. By using LibraryThing you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. Your use of the site and services is subject to these policies and terms.
  • LibraryThing
  • Book discussions
  • Your LibraryThing
  • Join to start using.

Big "other authors" changes (general discussion)

New features

Join LibraryThing to post.

This topic is currently marked as "dormant"—the last message is more than 90 days old. You can revive it by posting a reply.

1timspalding
Edited: Nov 1, 2011, 4:09pm Top

See http://www.librarything.com/blogs/librarything/2011/11/big-other-authors-changes...

Please post discussion here. Put true "bugs" here: http://www.librarything.com/topic/126077

First I want to know what you think generally, and what issues you see coming up. I see fights about what "main" and "secondary" authors means, and about whether we need to call people "author" under normal circumstances or not.

You will note some wrinkles in the translations here. The pre-populated roles are translated across languages, but user-added ones aren't. So if someone adds that so-and-so was the "chalk illustrator" of something that will be the text across all languages. That's a problem that may need a solution. At present, I'm recording what language they were in when they wrote it.

The whole thing also raises the issue of "Work/book pages and work- vs. book-level information"; see http://www.librarything.com/topic/126078

Lastly, it obviously raises the questions of:

1. Editions.
2. "Parts inside" a book (eg., essays, poems, stories, etc.)

All I can say is, we did this on the way to doing those. In general, I'm going to dissuade people from using this system as a substitute for an editions or "insides" layer. But obviously it does open some possibilities there.

2lemontwist
Nov 1, 2011, 4:09pm Top

Yay!!!!

3timspalding
Nov 1, 2011, 4:09pm Top

Thanks. Can that be the last comment, please? ;)

4lilithcat
Nov 1, 2011, 4:14pm Top

Okay, I love you. And what is my hat doing way up there?

Anyway, I just used the "other author" field to add an author to Clarence Darrow in Hell, and noticed that the first author is described as "primary author" and his co-author as "main author". What's the difference?

5brightcopy
Nov 1, 2011, 4:17pm Top

Very awesome much!

My obligatory suggestion: you sure you want to stick with the label "other authors" now that you can also edit the primary author there? Shouldn't it just be "authors"? I know I'd never think to look there if I was a new user and wasn't "in the know".

6timspalding
Nov 1, 2011, 4:21pm Top

Good point—and why Jeremy, myself and others need to work on the wiki page.

Primary: Basically, after some thought, LibraryThing is still following the library and most-publishing data convention of having one "lead" or "primary" author. This author is the one that the book is alphabetized by in a library or bookstore. And—currently—when a work is shown in a brief setting (eg., a recommendation), only this "primary" author is shown.

Main: Main authors are other "main" authors, who don't get the alphabetization, but get shown as equal under most circumstances. So, for example, Freakonomics reports that it is:

by Steven D. Levitt, Stephen J. Dubner

And the book appears in the "works by" section of both authors.

Secondary: Secondary is for authors who wouldn't normally be named as being the true and main author of the work. Clear cases would include someone who wrote an introduction to a work, someone who wrote one chapter in an anthology or—at least normally—the translator of a work.

Make sense?

7sophie65
Nov 1, 2011, 4:21pm Top

AWESOME!!!!

now the MOST important question.
is the main author of a comics the narrator or the illustrator?

8timspalding
Nov 1, 2011, 4:23pm Top

My obligatory suggestion: you sure you want to stick with the label "other authors" now that you can also edit the primary author there? Shouldn't it just be "authors"? I know I'd never think to look there if I was a new user and wasn't "in the know".

Yes, I went back and forth on that. My feeling is that:

1. Editing the primary author is the edge case.
2. Except in cases of craziness, editing the primary author is usually prompted by the addition of other authors—for example, if the primary author is just an editor.
3. I didn't want to list the primary author in the "other author" table when there was just him/her.

But these are not final decisions of mine, and I'm open to suggestions.

9timspalding
Nov 1, 2011, 4:24pm Top

is the main author of a comics the narrator or the illustrator?

My feeling is that both are main/primary, with their roles noted clearly. They should both show up on the main "by" line, on their author pages, etc. But I don't know who gets to be "primary" one, however. My guess is that you go with the FIRST author listed wherever, as that would be the one a quick person would alphabetize them under.

10brightcopy
Nov 1, 2011, 4:28pm Top

Okay, fair enough. Still think it's a bit confusing, but LT always has its quirks.

Other suggestion: better description when you click on the red X other than just "Reject?" A bit terse, no?

As far as the primary versus main author, I get your logic. But boy is it a bit hard to wrap the brain around. Is there some way different terminology can make it more understandable? Would calling it "lead author" versus "co-author" (rather than "primary" versus "main") make it any better? Or would it be just a different set of confusion?

11sophie65
Nov 1, 2011, 4:29pm Top

example:
http://www.librarything.com/series/Agent%252B212
each book appears twice - once under the text author, and once under the picture author.
In street talk, BOTH authors are equally credited, and one person can say he has the whole Daniel Kox collection, while another person is fan of Raoul Cauvin work.

12lilithcat
Nov 1, 2011, 4:33pm Top

> 6

Yes, it does.

13saltmanz
Nov 1, 2011, 4:42pm Top

You know what would be nice would be separate clickable checkmarks for "confirm some editions" and "confirm all editions". I'm going through my short story collections, and it's a pain having to edit each contributing author just to switch his status over to "all editions".

Otherwise, this is a fantastic feature!

14mart1n
Nov 1, 2011, 4:43pm Top

Coool :-)

However... this is probably me missing something, but:
a)
How come this book:
http://www.librarything.com/work/5133659/details/41624173
doesn't have the "other authors" bit at the top
b)
How do I make its primary author into an editor?

15brightcopy
Nov 1, 2011, 4:44pm Top

Hmmm, another observation. When there is only one author listed and that author's role is "author", perhaps the text "(Author)" could be omitted next to their name on the work-level byline.

I added an illustrator to The Drawing of the Three and thought, "Hey, I should specify that SK is the 'author' because '--' just seems wrong for the role." But doing that resulted in it showing up as:

The Drawing of the Three
by Stephen King (Author)

That just seems silly. So I changed it back to -- which now makes it:

The Drawing of the Three
by Stephen King

Now the byline looks less silly, but I think the "--" looks like there's incomplete data that is an invitation for someone to come in and jack with the system.

Of course, now I stop and think "Should I list SK at all, or should I just let the LT auto-calculation figure that part out?" I went back to delete him but found that my reject didn't take effect. Should probably mention that in the bug thread, though it may already be covered under the "hidden X" report I posted there.

16saltmanz
Nov 1, 2011, 4:47pm Top

Quick question: what's the difference between "author" and "contributor"? I've been marking the authors of short stories in anthologies as "authors" but am wondering if that's the favored approach.

17jbd1
Nov 1, 2011, 4:51pm Top

>16 saltmanz: - Those would be contributors. Author would be a main or co-author of a given work; if the work is made up of short stories or essays by different authors, each would be a contributor.

18brightcopy
Nov 1, 2011, 4:53pm Top

16> Good question. It seems to me like "contributor" is too generic a catchall and should be eliminated. Because if you have a book of poetry, contributor is "poet". If you have a book of songs, "songwriter". A graphic novel anthology, "illustrator" (or "author", of course).

(Of course, that brings up another question which is what "narrator" is, exactly. In terms of printed books, I think "narrator" doesn't make sense and that's an "author" - graphic novels included. The only "narrator" I think makes sense is for audiobooks, and this isn't really set up for performers anyway.)

19jbd1
Nov 1, 2011, 4:56pm Top

>18 brightcopy: - Yeah, if I'm remembering the discussions from when we put these roles out before, narrator's in there for audiobooks.

I think if contributor is understand in the context of a specific, distinct, partial contribution to a work, it makes sense. i.e. http://www.librarything.com/work/11034143, http://www.librarything.com/work/106487

20mart1n
Nov 1, 2011, 5:01pm Top

>14 mart1n: a) Ah, I assume that the contributors of the example I give are set at book rather than work level. So the question becomes how to apply them to the work level, which clearly they ought to be.

21jbd1
Nov 1, 2011, 5:03pm Top

Right - go to the work page (http://www.librarything.com/work/5133659) and scroll down to the "Other authors" section (above Common Knowledge). You'll see the suggested "other authors" there, and can go in and edit them as appropriate, or add more.

22brightcopy
Nov 1, 2011, 5:04pm Top

19> I understand your point, but I think the system is just going to be rife with "errors" (people putting things as author/illustrator/etc. that should be "contributor"). As in, just as common to see it one way as the other. I think inconsistent data might be the only constant.

23jbd1
Nov 1, 2011, 5:08pm Top

Well, we'll do a help page with examples (as we did with work-to-work relationships), that hopefully will help with some of that, but yes, there will likely be ambiguities.

24mart1n
Nov 1, 2011, 5:17pm Top

>21 jbd1:
Ok, thanks.
Couple of points:

How do I get to the work page from the book page (if this is a silly question, it's cos my brain is mush).

Also, aargh! I've got a hell of a lot of tedious confirming to do for my comic collection. I suppose assuming other authors apply to all editions would have led to too much bad data? But even so, some whimpering here...

25jbd1
Nov 1, 2011, 5:22pm Top

>23 jbd1: Click the "Main page" link on the sidebar to get to the work page.
Sorry about the "some editions" thing. Yes, it's a pain; but better some work then lots of accidental bad data.

262wonderY
Nov 1, 2011, 5:23pm Top

Would I be too zealous if I eliminate some of the duplicate author choices when I find this?
▼Other authors
» Add/edit other authors (50 possible)

There are lots of false choices based on typos and entries that try to combine two or more authors into one.

27jbd1
Nov 1, 2011, 5:23pm Top

No - bad choices/dupes/typos/&c. can certainly be removed.

28andyl
Nov 1, 2011, 5:32pm Top

Some questions

The Starry Rift - http://www.librarything.com/work/4290481

The book shows "Jonathan Strahan" as primary author and "Strahan, Jonathan" as Editor, main author.

1) Why is one first last and the other last, first?
2) Why are both shown at the top? They are the same person (and the links redirect to the same author page)

Finally

3) Would I be correct in changing it Jonathan Strahan to Editor, Primary Author (following the Orbit 10 example from the blog post) and deleting the main author line?

29jbd1
Nov 1, 2011, 5:34pm Top

>28 andyl: to Question 3 - yes. :-) They're both up there because both entries have been entered and confirmed, but in this case, the "primary author" should set Jonathan Strahan as the editor (this was perhaps done by a beta member before the ability to set primary author roles was introduced)

30timspalding
Nov 1, 2011, 5:43pm Top

Other suggestion: better description when you click on the red X other than just "Reject?" A bit terse, no?

Yes. Changed to "Reject and delete this author?"

Would calling it "lead author" versus "co-author" (rather than "primary" versus "main") make it any better? Or would it be just a different set of confusion?

I don't think so, but I'm open. "Co-author" is a specific sort of main author. For example, I'd say that Margaret Wise Brown and Clement Hurd were both the main authors of Goodnight Moon, one as illustrator and one as writer of the text. But were they "co-authors"? I think "co-author" connotes that they were both textual authors.

sophie65

Can you explain yourself more clearly here?

it's a pain having to edit each contributing author just to switch his status over to "all editions"

I feel your pain, although it's not just that switch. Sometimes I want to repeat an action a number of times. Anyone got a more general solution?

some whimpering here

Yeah, a general solution?

Hmmm, another observation. When there is only one author listed and that author's role is "author", perhaps the text "(Author)" could be omitted next to their name on the work-level byline.

Yes, I think that's solid. That's how I'm looking at it.

28

There's no good answer for errors other than, well, we're trying to create new, clear data from a mixed hodge-podge of user data. That's one reason we haven't auto-confirmed anything.

Your solution sounds exactly right.

31macsbrains
Edited: Nov 1, 2011, 7:35pm Top

I don't want to break things so, question:

In this work, http://www.librarything.com/work/11294460/ I added the second author, however, I would switch the order of the co-authors so the other one is primary (she is listed first on the cover). I get a scary note when I go to edit the primary author, so I figured I would ask here first if I am correct to do so before I go ahead with attempting to do it.

ETA: Also, it is extremely confusing that the primary author seems to be written first, last and others are written last, first in the list. I keep thinking that the first one listed is always wrong.

ETA: I added Tim White as a cover artist to The Great Book of Amber by Roger Zelazny, but when I go to the Tim White author page (http://www.librarything.com/author/whitetim ) it says at the top that he is author of The Great Book of Amber which is not the case. I presume this is because that work has so many more copies than anything else attributed to him, though down below it specifies that he is the cover artist under "also by Tim White." Maybe things should be changed where primary authorial positions are not trumped by the secondary ones on the author page. Is there a situation where this would not be preferred?

32eromsted
Nov 1, 2011, 7:37pm Top

it's a pain having to edit each contributing author just to switch his status over to "all editions"

Yes.

I feel your pain, although it's not just that switch. Sometimes I want to repeat an action a number of times. Anyone got a more general solution?

Check-boxes with an option to make the same change for all checked authors.

33eromsted
Nov 1, 2011, 7:38pm Top

Also, I seem to have to go through the whole change primary author dialog even when all I want to do is change the role of the primary author (say to editor).

34_Zoe_
Nov 1, 2011, 7:56pm Top

I wish you didn't have a line of super-prime real estate on the work pages devoted to a link to see other authors, when the other authors only apply to certain editions. This is particularly noticeable with audiobook narrators. Why not add a link in the left sidebar instead?

Also, was there always an empty line between the author and the series? It seems like the real information keeps moving farther and farther down the work page.

35lucien
Nov 1, 2011, 8:59pm Top

I don't know if this is a bug or a feature request. When trying to add an author with an "other" role, there is no option to specify what that role is - even if original entry pulled from a user's catalog had one.

For example, I was adding authors to the graphical adaptation of the The Wonderful Wizard of Oz and Jean-Francois Beaulieu was in the other author list. I picked the entry with the role "Colorist" since it was more precise than the one with "Illustrator". In the other author table, however, the role is blank. I realize that some user entered roles may be very specific, but things like Colorist and Letterer are general roles for a lot of graphic novels.

36timspalding
Nov 1, 2011, 9:41pm Top

I wish you didn't have a line of super-prime real estate on the work pages devoted to a link to see other authors, when the other authors only apply to certain editions. This is particularly noticeable with audiobook narrators. Why not add a link in the left sidebar instead?

So, originally I had all the authors crammed in there too, not just a link. It all depends how valuable the information is. The narrator of the Hungarian ebook? Not to important. Seamus Heaney as translator of Beowulf? Important.

The left side bar is for separate pages, not regions on the page.

For example, I was adding authors to the graphical adaptation of the The Wonderful Wizard of Oz and Jean-Francois Beaulieu was in the other author list. I picked the entry with the role "Colorist" since it was more precise than the one with "Illustrator". In the other author table, however, the role is blank. I realize that some user entered roles may be very specific, but things like Colorist and Letterer are general roles for a lot of graphic novels.

You don't get the drop-down menu when you add or edit?

37lucien
Edited: Nov 1, 2011, 9:46pm Top

You don't get the drop-down menu when you add or edit?

I get a drop down menu and the last option is "Other". But when I select it there is no pop-up or text box for me to enter what that "other" is.

38timspalding
Nov 1, 2011, 9:58pm Top

Ahhhhh.... k.

39prosfilaes
Nov 1, 2011, 10:22pm Top

#36: Given that we have to quantize importance, I don't see the difference between the narrator of the Hungarian ebook or the translator of one edition. Having worked on the 1903 The Translations of Beowulf for Project Gutenberg, I'm a little dismissive of the concept that one recent translation of Beowulf into one language as a defining property of the poem.

40_Zoe_
Nov 1, 2011, 10:26pm Top

It all depends how valuable the information is. The narrator of the Hungarian ebook? Not to important. Seamus Heaney as translator of Beowulf? Important.

Actually, I think that listing Seamus Heaney as the translator on the Beowulf work page is more misleading than valuable. If it doesn't apply to all instances of the work, it shouldn't be at the top of the default work page. Keep the edition stuff for edition-level pages.

The problem with the Hungarian ebook narrator isn't the Hungarian part, or the narrator part, but the fact that it doesn't apply to all instances of the work.

41timspalding
Edited: Nov 1, 2011, 10:29pm Top

>40 _Zoe_:

Right. But presently he should not be. The top part only shows work-level authors. All edition-level ones have been moved, and only a link down the page is there.

42prosfilaes
Nov 1, 2011, 10:29pm Top

Now that the title on the top of the page is the work title, a book page like http://www.librarything.com/work/2214/76575003 shows that user's title and author nowhere. It seems very weird to have an info line like "Info: Baltimore : Penguin Books, 1963." and omit their title.

43prosfilaes
Nov 1, 2011, 10:35pm Top

Looking at Beowulf, should we really have Heaney, Seamus in there 3 times (ignoring primary author) and Raffel, Burton in there twice? There's literally dozens of translators for Beowulf; did we need to have people in there for writing the introduction when they're already in there for translating?

44_Zoe_
Nov 1, 2011, 10:36pm Top

>41 timspalding: So, is Beowulf just a case where the basic concept of a work breaks down? It seems that Heaney has been listed as the main author by enough people for him to be considered the author of the whole work, even though he isn't. This seems like an awkward example to take as the basis of this whole feature.

Anyway, I don't think the link to "unimportant" other authors needs to be nearly so prominent, regardless of how importance is defined. If it's not important enough to be shown at the top, it's not important enough to merit a huge link taking up prime real estate.

45eromsted
Nov 1, 2011, 10:44pm Top

Questions:

Multiple roles. At the moment there's really no good way to indicate an author with multiple roles for work (e.g. editor/contributor or translator/introduction). Here's an example where someone confirmed both to roles for two other authors - http://www.librarything.com/work/34589.

I don't really like the way this looks. In addition, only one role displays with the work on the author page. And in the case of Dorothy Sayers and the Song of Roland I'd say it has picked the lesser of her two roles.

Some/All editions. So what do I do if I just don't know? My 1st edition copy of The Religion of Java has a short forward by Douglas Oliver. Was this forward reprinted in all subsequent editions? I have no idea. WorldCat doesn't even have a mention of the forward for my edition.

Now I could leave it as some editions because it's just not important enough to get top of the page billing. But that's not formally the right reason to choose one over the other.

46eromsted
Nov 1, 2011, 10:46pm Top

Heh, prosfilaes asked part of my question while I was typing.

And I'm for switching the primary author of Beowulf to Anonymous.

47timspalding
Nov 2, 2011, 12:43am Top

a huge link

It's a single line of 12-point text. It's hardly huge!

48prosfilaes
Nov 2, 2011, 1:01am Top

#47: I'm counting 20 lines from the title to bottom line on my screen. I think there's a real question about what that line needs to be one of those 20.

49Heather19
Edited: Nov 2, 2011, 1:12am Top

My first and foremost thought was "oh crap, now we'll have a bajillion links to a bajillion authors that are only relevent on certain editions, at the very top of the work-page".

But thanks to that Beowulf example (I had clicked on a few books but hadn't found any with lots of comfirmed other authors before), I see that's not the case. So THANK YOU for thinking of that!

I don't much "do" Other Authors, so this isn't a huge thing for me, but I'm glad to see it finally here!

(But did you HAVE to release it the first day of National Novel Writing Month? I'm supposed to be writing!! :P )

edit:48: how are you defining "lines"? I just counted roughly 50 on a random workpage. *is confused*

50prosfilaes
Edited: Nov 2, 2011, 1:37am Top

Looking at http://www.librarything.com/work/2449742 scrolled all the way to top, I counted every line with text; "Beowulf" as line 1, "Your top 100 similar libraries FredKiesche, martijnw, malloyd, g026r, vinegartom, jtevans, StormRaven, GrouchyChris, LibrarianFu, B3agleboy" as line 19, and "— 13 more" as line 20. That's where my screen cuts off.

51Mareofthesea
Nov 2, 2011, 2:11am Top

Help!

I am working on this anthology: http://www.librarything.com/work/77972/summary/78965803

I'm trying to get Mary Balogh as the primary author, but can't seem to get that figured out. Is it because Edith Layton is the first author listed on the copy with the most users? On the cover, Mary Balogh is listed first, so I am taking that as her being the Primary.

52prosfilaes
Nov 2, 2011, 2:55am Top

#51: Go to "Add/edit other authors" and click on the pencil next to Edith Layton. You can then edit her entry to be whatever you want, and then you would need to add Edith Layton as an author. I wouldn't, though; changing the primary isn't really for picking and choosing which main author you want as primary, it's for cases when the primary author isn't really an author of the work.

53rsterling
Nov 2, 2011, 3:15am Top

Changing the primary author seems like a good solution for those cases where the last-name-only author is winning out, no? (And similar cases which were resulting in single-author splits and aliasing?)

54Mareofthesea
Nov 2, 2011, 3:57am Top

For the book I was referring to in 51, both Amazon and WorldCat give Mary Balogh the credit as the first author. As she is also the author listed first on the cover, I see her as being the primary author.

Incidently, there is another book I ran into with a similar issue. Also attributing Edith Layton as the primary author. Is it possible that the edition with the most copies had been changed by a user to show Edith Layton instead of Mary Balogh?

55_Zoe_
Nov 2, 2011, 8:49am Top

Yup, I actually see only 17.5 lines of text on the Beowulf page. And the Other Authors link line arguably takes up two lines because it's set off from the rest by a blank line.

So, I'd move the Other Authors link to the left sidebar. The whole point of the left sidebar is to contain links.

I also wonder whether the Add to Your Library and Add to Wishlist buttons could be moved into the white space to the right of the title and author, instead of getting a line of their own.

And I'd like to be able to move the Book Information box, like the other boxes, so that I can get it out of the way.

And I wish we could re-arrange the right sidebar for ourselves too, so that I could put the long section of which publishers have published a book below the concise and informative rating box.

Basically, we're getting less and less control over the work pages and the stuff I actually care about is getting farther and farther away. Yes, each thing is only one line, but it adds up.

56SylviaC
Nov 2, 2011, 9:04am Top

54> Mareofthesea
Was the other book A Regency Christmas Carol? I ran into that one yesterday, and left it because I wasn't sure what to do. Mary Balogh is the first author listed on the cover, and has the first novella in the book, so she should be the primary author, but the most copies have Edith Layton as author, even though her name is last on the cover. I think it must be the way the authors came up when people uploaded data from Amazon.

I'm inclined to change it, but I'm not sure.

57Mareofthesea
Nov 2, 2011, 10:03am Top

56: I'm pretty sure that was the other one I was looking at. That one is kinda odd, Amazon has Layton listed first, yet WorldCat has Balogh.

58eromsted
Nov 2, 2011, 10:04am Top

Main or secondary for editors of collections of writings by a single author when the selection of what to include was done by the editor not the author? I lean towards main.

59jbd1
Nov 2, 2011, 10:08am Top

I've started putting examples and proposed usage notes on the wiki page. Discussion, thoughts, &c. entirely welcomed! This is really just a template so far; input would be fantastic.

>58 eromsted: - I'd lean toward main too. Others?

60brightcopy
Nov 2, 2011, 10:17am Top

Back to the "contributor" question. So in a graphic novel anthology, all the inkers, letterers, colorists, pencilers, and writers of all the various stories would just become "contributors"? Doesn't that unnecessarily impoverish the data?

61ringman
Nov 2, 2011, 10:29am Top

What do we do about author pseudonyms?
Examples are - Flatland by Edwin A. Abbott where "A Square" his original pseudonym appears as an additional other.
Similarly there are works by Ian Rankin originally written as jack Harvey.

62jbd1
Nov 2, 2011, 10:30am Top

>60 brightcopy: Well, I think there's definitely a case to be made that we need additional roles for graphic works. I wouldn't think all those you list would be necessary, but if there are some we need to add, we'll add them.

63LShelby
Nov 2, 2011, 10:32am Top

I don't know that this belongs here, but after adding some contributing "secondary authors" last night, I still can't find them in an author search this morning yet. But the legal name of one of them that I entered into the CK does appear in author search -- only, if you follow the link to the page, there are no works on it. Is this supposed to happen?

64jbd1
Nov 2, 2011, 10:35am Top

>63 LShelby: - it does take some time for search indexes to catch up with newly-added authors and titles. Definitely normal.

65eromsted
Nov 2, 2011, 10:42am Top

>62 jbd1:
OK. But the question was about secondary authors of parts of an anthology. This happens with translators as well. None of the translators I have listed for The Philosophy of Nietzsche: Thus Spake Zarathustra; Beyond Good and Evil; The Genealogy of Morals; Ecce Homo; The Birth of Tragedy was responsible for translating the whole anthology. Each translated one (or two) of the included works.

Should they simply be listed as translators on the anthology work page, or as something else?

66LShelby
Nov 2, 2011, 10:44am Top

>64 jbd1: That things hadn't shown up yet wasn't what I found strange. :)

What I found strange was that the name I had entered into the "legal name" of the CK showed up in the author search when the name on the author page in which I had entered it didn't.

Also I am puzzled as to why LT would want to create workless author pages for CK listed legal names, which apparently cannot be combined with the name that the author is really known by, because you can't combine authors that don't have any works.

67jbd1
Nov 2, 2011, 10:45am Top

>65 eromsted: - So each translator just translated one section of the anthology? I'd think then yes, secondary author, role translaor, some editions. At this point it's not possible indicate which part they translated, &c. Does that make sense? If I'm misunderstanding the scenario, let me know (I'm not familiar with the specific volume).

68jbd1
Nov 2, 2011, 10:46am Top

>66 LShelby: - Give me an example, please? It's hard to talk about these things in the abstract :-)

69brightcopy
Nov 2, 2011, 10:46am Top

#62 by jbd1> Well, I think there's definitely a case to be made that we need additional roles for graphic works. I wouldn't think all those you list would be necessary, but if there are some we need to add, we'll add them.

I'm wondering if you missed the point of the question. Extra roles added to the dropdown wouldn't matter, because you said when it's an anthology, all the roles should just be "contributor". As opposed to a non-anthology, in which you would specify the roles (at least author, illustrator, editor, etc.) That's what I mean when I say you're impoverishing the data in an anthology by collapsing everyone to a "contributor".

70jbd1
Nov 2, 2011, 10:51am Top

>69 brightcopy: - I'm not disagreeing that contributor has a certain nebulousness about it. But I don't think there's a perfect solution, either.

71lilithcat
Nov 2, 2011, 10:51am Top

> 62

I desperately need "paper engineer"!

72jbd1
Nov 2, 2011, 10:52am Top

>71 lilithcat:- whaaaa?? :-)

73timspalding
Edited: Nov 2, 2011, 11:07am Top

I wouldn't, though; changing the primary isn't really for picking and choosing which main author you want as primary, it's for cases when the primary author isn't really an author of the work.

I think it is, if the change really has stronger argument. The current answer is, however, the consensus of our current data. So I think you need a strong argument to overturn it, not just that your edition lists the authors in a different order.

Changing the primary author seems like a good solution for those cases where the last-name-only author is winning out, no? (And similar cases which were resulting in single-author splits and aliasing?)

My opinion? Yes. I think we have our solution.

So, I'd move the Other Authors link to the left sidebar. The whole point of the left sidebar is to contain links.

Sorry, but this is user-interface madness, Zoe. The left navigation all links to other pages. The metaphor is a main page and sub-pages. And whatever page you are on gets bolded, indicating the sense of hierarchy of pages at stake. Using this area to link to a region on the main page breaks the whole idea--it would be the only link that acted like that, and it certainly couldn't be bolded.

I also wonder whether the Add to Your Library and Add to Wishlist buttons could be moved into the white space to the right of the title and author, instead of getting a line of their own.

Yeah, I tried that, but it kills the one area of decent white space on most work pages. It just makes it look cluttered.

And I'd like to be able to move the Book Information box, like the other boxes, so that I can get it out of the way.

Working on it.

after adding some contributing "secondary authors" last night, I still can't find them in an author search this morning yet

Yes. They're not there. I'll get them in. Some reengineering is necessary, and I wanted to see if there were big changes.

Also I am puzzled as to why LT would want to create workless author pages for CK listed legal names, which apparently cannot be combined with the name that the author is really known by, because you can't combine authors that don't have any works.

We didn't. The CK legal name issue is just a coincidence, I believe. Someone at some point had that name as a normal name on some work or book, and that's how the page was made.

74jbd1
Nov 2, 2011, 11:09am Top

Moving the "roles" discussion to a different thread:

http://www.librarything.com/topic/126136

75_Zoe_
Nov 2, 2011, 11:14am Top

Sorry, but this is user-interface madness, Zoe.

Sorry, I must have been misremembering or thinking of some other site that links to sections of the main page.

In that case, I just don't think we need a link to the Other Authors section. If they're important enough, they show up at the top. If not, they just show up in their relevant section. If people think the Other Authors section is most important, they can move it to the top. No other section has a link like that, though I do think it's worth noting that most other sections have a whole other related page that can be easily accessed from the left.

Yeah, I tried that, but it kills the one area of decent white space on most work pages. It just makes it look cluttered.

Hmm. I wonder if there's somewhere else they can go.

Working on it.

Yay, thanks! Next step: making our work page preferences permanent, so that we don't have to re-do them all the time ;)

76timspalding
Nov 2, 2011, 11:24am Top

Sorry, I must have been misremembering or thinking of some other site that links to sections of the main page.

Sorry to call it madness. Too much Pro and Con for me!

77_Zoe_
Nov 2, 2011, 11:27am Top

Oh, I don't much care about the label. But what about the general idea, that the Other Authors link is unnecessary?

78LShelby
Nov 2, 2011, 11:35am Top

#68 Um, okay, the long version...

Last night I filled in contributor info for an anthology I was published in using a pen name, and then went to my newly created Author page and added some CK, including my full legal name.
http://www.librarything.com/author/shelbyl

Later I remembered that some people track magazines here too, and went and looked up a magazine in which a long time ago I had published an article under a shorter variant of my legal name. I found it, and added the contributor info for that work just the way it was in the table of contents -- giving me a second author page. But I left all the CK for that page blank because I'd filled it in on the pen name page, and I was pretty sure the proper thing to do was combine my two names into a single author. http://www.librarything.com/author/bottorffmichelle

When I tried to do a search (last night) so that I could combine myself with myself, neither author page showed up. I wasn't surprised because I had just created both pages, and knew it took a while for search to catch up.

But this morning, when I tried to combine again from the pen name page, instead of finding the page that listed the magazine, I found a page which has my full legal name, and no listed works. This page did not show up on the search last night, and the only place I can think of that it might have come from is the CK data I entered on my pen name page last night. I tried combining that blank page with one of the other pages (actually I think I tried both), and was told this author has no works -- combination fails.
http://www.librarything.com/author/bottorffmichellerosa

So when I posted here I was trying to figure out if this was something that would just sort itself out out when the system caught up with itself, or if it was a bug like the one that showed up when I asked when I, a lowly "secondary author", clicked on my "Is this you?" button, or if it was a "undocumented feature" to have legal names from CK pop up in the author searches with blank author pages attached to them.

Hope this clarifies everything, and sorry to have taken up so much space.

79paradoxosalpha
Nov 2, 2011, 11:36am Top

> 78

I have encountered a closely analogous pattern.

80LShelby
Nov 2, 2011, 12:13pm Top

#73 We didn't. The CK legal name issue is just a coincidence, I believe. Someone at some point had that name as a normal name on some work or book, and that's how the page was made.

Someone at some point would have to be someone entering a book with my very uncommon full legal name and then removing the book again in a timespan that would have the name not showing up in searches made last night, and yet appearing this morning. You may believe it, but I just can't. Sorry.

I'll take "random computer glitch" as an explanation first, if you don't mind. :)

81brightcopy
Nov 2, 2011, 12:23pm Top

Hmm, I just started to notice a possibly unexpected trend, and one that adds more weight to Zoe's suggestion to move Other Authors out of the top section.

Audiobooks. They have narrators (among other things). Lots of books have them. So what I'm seeing is that MOST popular books will wind up having at least narrators in Other Authors.

82timspalding
Nov 2, 2011, 12:24pm Top

But they will never be all-editions, so they will never be in the top section.

83brightcopy
Nov 2, 2011, 12:29pm Top

Ah, okay. Didn't know that logic was happening.

84lilithcat
Nov 2, 2011, 12:35pm Top

> 72

For my collection of pop-up books. A "paper engineer" is the person who designs the pop-ups.

85timspalding
Nov 2, 2011, 12:37pm Top

>84 lilithcat:

If we do paper airplane books, what happens if one of the airplanes ends up inside another book?

86lilithcat
Nov 2, 2011, 12:41pm Top

> 85

All the characters will fly away.

87brightcopy
Nov 2, 2011, 12:42pm Top

#85 by timspalding> Isn't that what Contained in/by is for?

88_Zoe_
Nov 2, 2011, 12:42pm Top

Just to clarify, I don't generally have a problem with all-edition other authors appearing at the top (within reason--if we start seeing more than a few authors there, it will get problematic). What I particularly object to is the link to the Other Authors section, which doesn't in itself display any information. This link does currently appear every time a popular book has also been released as an audiobook. But hopefully it's on its way out anyway, as per the other thread :)

89lilithcat
Nov 2, 2011, 12:45pm Top

> 88

I don't understand your issue with the Other Authors link. Personally, I'm finding it extremely useful. Since only primary & main authors show at the top, the fact that the link is there tells me immediately that other authors have been added.

90saltmanz
Edited: Nov 2, 2011, 1:03pm Top

What I find odd about the Other Authors link is that it goes "Other Authors (list)" and then "Other authors: See the other authors section" immediately below, which certainly appears redundant. (I know it's not.)

What if the link said something like "Other Authors for some editions: see below"?

91rsterling
Nov 2, 2011, 1:03pm Top

Is there a log for changing the "primary author"? The light box says it's tracked and checked by other members.

92lemontwist
Nov 2, 2011, 1:22pm Top

What will happen to the "old" other authors data? Will that get phased out or merged with the "new" way? Especially because the other authors field in the catalog shows the old data and not the new stuff...

93timspalding
Nov 2, 2011, 1:23pm Top

Is there a log for changing the "primary author"? The light box says it's tracked and checked by other members.

Not yet. It's logged.

94Crypto-Willobie
Nov 2, 2011, 1:24pm Top

I was out yesterday evening so didn't see this until now, but let me just say HOORAH! The inadequate author system was my only significant gripe about LT, my home away from home. Tweaks and adjustments, ok, go ahead and improve the author system even more if you want, but even as is this now takes care of my author needs. Thanks heaps to Tim and crew!

95timspalding
Nov 2, 2011, 1:24pm Top

What will happen to the "old" other authors data? Will that get phased out or merged with the "new" way? Especially because the other authors field in the catalog shows the old data and not the new stuff...

I think you're confusing work and book authors.

96_Zoe_
Nov 2, 2011, 1:48pm Top

I don't understand your issue with the Other Authors link. Personally, I'm finding it extremely useful. Since only primary & main authors show at the top, the fact that the link is there tells me immediately that other authors have been added.

My issue is that the main instance where I'm seeing it is when there are no "real" other authors, just a narrator for the audiobook. So the link occurs on pretty much every new popular work, and the data is more often than not edition-specific and irrelevant to the work as a whole.

At the very least, I don't think the Other Authors link should appear unless there are other authors that apply to all editions. "Click to see who narrated the audiobook of this work" is just not the #3 most important thing about the work.

In cases where the linked data is actually relevant to the work as a whole, the link could still be reduced to a small (see more) text on the author line, instead of getting a whole two lines of its own.

97jjwilson61
Nov 2, 2011, 1:48pm Top

95> You have to admit it's a little odd having the same data fields at the book and work level. I can see that it allows someone to list a different primary author than the group-think consensus primary author but at the cost of a bit of complexity and likely confusion.

98lilithcat
Nov 2, 2011, 1:58pm Top

> 96

My issue is that the main instance where I'm seeing it is when there are no "real" other authors, just a narrator for the audiobook.

Define "real". I see it when there are illustrators, editors, writers of introductions, etc. All important contributions. Seems to me that your one instance of "just a narrator for the audiobook" is the bathwater. Why throw out the baby?

99_Zoe_
Nov 2, 2011, 2:04pm Top

>98 lilithcat: Because there's so much bathwater that I can't even find the baby anymore?

Looking through the last 30 books I read, I counted 8 with narrator-only other authors, and zero with non-narrator other authors.

100lilithcat
Nov 2, 2011, 2:10pm Top

> 99

You know, I haven't seen any of my books with "narrator-only other authors", and a ton with non-narrator other authors.

101_Zoe_
Nov 2, 2011, 2:16pm Top

It probably comes down to whether we're reading current popular books or more obscure/older books (though my obscure books just tend not to have any other authors at all).

I wonder whether there could be a more nuanced system for determining when to show the link. I think my issue would pretty much be addressed if it just didn't appear in cases where the only other authors were narrators.

102DromJohn
Nov 2, 2011, 3:54pm Top

I recommend "Publisher" as an "other" option.

103saltmanz
Nov 2, 2011, 3:59pm Top

102: Ooh, yes.

104jbd1
Nov 2, 2011, 4:02pm Top

>102 DromJohn: - Publisher is, I think, a different sort of animal. As we dive deeper into the whole expressions/editions thing we'll be adding different sorts of fields to capture publisher data, so having them within the section of author/contributors isn't the direction we want to go.

105saltmanz
Nov 2, 2011, 4:06pm Top

@ 104: What about in the case of books where the publisher gets billing above any authors or editors, like The Story, or just about any cookbook?

106lemontwist
Nov 2, 2011, 4:12pm Top

>104 jbd1:. Can't wait for that!!!

107lorax
Nov 2, 2011, 4:15pm Top

105>

"Just about any"? Something like two or three of the 50+ cookbooks I have cataloged meet that description; what are you basing that statement on?

108eromsted
Nov 2, 2011, 4:15pm Top

>105 saltmanz:
I think I would list those as 'corporate author'. And that is another role I manually enter fairly often.

109jbd1
Nov 2, 2011, 4:19pm Top

>105 saltmanz:/108. Bleh. Well, in cases where something other than a human is the listed author, they're the author (yes, as eromsted notes, the corporate author). And, in some cases, the publisher too. But publisher data will be captured elsewhere.

110saltmanz
Nov 2, 2011, 4:22pm Top

@107: Okay, my handful of cookbooks.

111prosfilaes
Nov 2, 2011, 5:04pm Top

I'm really seeing "secondary author" swamp "primary author" stuff in an unhealthy way. Björn Collinder was a Swedish scholar. I suspect if his translation of Beowulf was a separate work, it would have less than 10 copies in the system, like the rest of his books. But because he's listed as a translator on the combined Beowulf, it takes over his work page. Members is filled with people who almost certainly don't have a copy of his translation. Worse yet, his tags list has been completely taken over by Beowulf tags. The fact that he was a linguist who wrote about Swedish and the Uralic languages is completely lost.

112jbd1
Nov 2, 2011, 5:07pm Top

>111 prosfilaes: - That's a great example. Thanks! I agree that we've got to figure something out about how these are factoring in (but I haven't talked to Tim about it yet, so I don't know his thinking on this question).

113LShelby
Nov 2, 2011, 5:08pm Top

#111 That doesn't sound like a secondary versus primary author problem to me. It sounds like a "on some editions" problem. "Authors" that only show up on some editions shouldn't be getting tags and member counts from all editions.

114prosfilaes
Edited: Nov 2, 2011, 5:15pm Top

#113: I'm not sure how main author on some editions, makes sense or what the system does with it. It seems like it should be a three-way option, not two two-way options.

In this case, you may be right, but I can see the same problem with someone who's been tagged for an introduction on all editions of a really popular work.

BTW: If anyone wants to see a large Other Authors box, I added all the early translators of Beowulf to Beowulf, so that's starting to approach the size of what all major works of literature are going to look like.

115LShelby
Nov 2, 2011, 5:24pm Top

#114 Yes, I agree that there should be importance of role filtering happening also.

116brightcopy
Nov 2, 2011, 5:26pm Top

111/112> One thing I think makes sense: Don't use works where the author is secondary for any of the green boxes on the right. Just don't think that should happen.

Beowulf: Why does it show Heaney as the work author, still? Shouldn't it be showing Anonymous, which is set in the OA section? I tried recalculate title/author, no joy.

117lilithcat
Nov 2, 2011, 5:41pm Top

> 116

I edited the field to show the Author role for "Anonymous", and that seems to have fixed it.

118DromJohn
Nov 2, 2011, 5:42pm Top

I would defer to "Corporate Author" over "Publisher".

119jjwilson61
Nov 2, 2011, 5:49pm Top

118> But the role is author. Whether it's corporate or individual is an attribute of the author not an attribute of the role.

120brightcopy
Nov 2, 2011, 6:10pm Top

#117 by lilithcat> Huh. So role matters a lot, apparently. I wasn't filling it in because Tim has yet to do the logic to snip "(Author)" off the name (well, I also haven't done it because I'm not editing a lot right now).

Good to know!

121leahbird
Edited: Nov 2, 2011, 6:20pm Top

#51 by Mareofthesea> Shouldn't these authors be listed as contributors rather than main authors since it's an anthology? I was under the assumption that co-authors should only be used when multiple authors co-wrote an entire novel, such as Terry Prachett and Neil Gaiman writing Good Omens together, and contributor should be used when each author contributed a piece of writing.

122prosfilaes
Nov 2, 2011, 6:30pm Top

#121: Once yesterday I used author for three authors and contributor for the rest because that's how they were listed on the publisher page.

123Mareofthesea
Nov 3, 2011, 2:27am Top

121. Yes, as per Jeremy in post 17 above. I realized that shortly before I got called into work today.

My thought process was something along the lines of, well they contributed to the anthology, but they are still authors of stories contained within the anthology. As a reader, I rank author higher than contributor.

However, I will bow to the higher authority on this one.

124henkl
Nov 3, 2011, 5:19am Top

>117 lilithcat: Alas, Beowulf's page still has Seamus Heany as author.

125lilithcat
Nov 3, 2011, 9:19am Top

> 124

What the heck?

126DromJohn
Nov 3, 2011, 9:33am Top

Since LT still doesn't import 710 "Corporate Author" :-(
then LT thinks "Corporate Author" doesn't equal "Author".
So for LT "Corporate Author" is an "Other Author".

127Nerilka
Nov 3, 2011, 10:47am Top

>124 henkl:,125

If you set the Primary Author in Other authors, the work page shows the author as Anonymous. However, when someone clicks recalculate title/author it reverts to Seamus Heaney. So you can reset the primary author back to Anon....

Could become a permanent loop fixing it as the results of neither function seems to be deemed authoritative.

128norabelle414
Nov 3, 2011, 10:55am Top

With the ability to set the primary author, is there any point in having the author in "recalculate title/author"?

129brightcopy
Nov 3, 2011, 10:57am Top

#128 by norabelle414> Yes, as Tim has said setting the primary author should be more of an exception than the rule. In general, LT is supposed to be able to figure it out on its own.

130fdholt
Nov 5, 2011, 11:12am Top

#126 Actually, I have imported the 110 as corporate author and the 710 also from other libraries. However, LT reads a 700 first (named authors) if there is no 1XX field so that comes to the top.

And thanks for this great feature. Just getting around to exploring it.

131StephenBarkley
Nov 9, 2011, 11:58am Top

Sorry if I missed this somewhere, but do we have a solution for a secondary author with multiple roles?

See: http://www.librarything.com/work/book/79763001

Patrick Miller is the editor who wrote the introduction. Should I select "Other" and type in "Editor/Introduction" or just leave him in his primary role as editor?

132timspalding
Nov 9, 2011, 12:07pm Top

An open question, I think.

My inclination would be to list both on separate lines. What do others think?

133jjwilson61
Nov 9, 2011, 12:13pm Top

Definitely separate lines or you lose information. BrightCopy had some mock-ups of how you could make the display look better when an author is listed multiple times, but I don't really see the problem.

134saltmanz
Edited: Nov 9, 2011, 12:16pm Top

Beyond that, what about one author with Primary and Secondary roles? See Warriors, an anthology edited by George R. R. Martin, but including a story by him (not to mention the introduction. ) I've put him on three roles: Editor (Primary), Contributor (Secondary), and Introduction (Secondary).

135brightcopy
Nov 9, 2011, 12:25pm Top

#133 by jjwilson61> For reference, here's that post with my suggestions:

http://www.librarything.com/topic/126136#3013115

136rebeccanyc
Nov 9, 2011, 1:01pm Top

#132, 133 I've been giving them separate lines and also doing as saltmanz says in 134. And I like brightcopy's suggestion too.

137abbottthomas
Nov 9, 2011, 2:34pm Top

What is supposed to happen when 'other authors' arrive on a split author disambiguation page? I was tidying up Robert Gould here: http://www.librarything.com/author/gouldrobert

In this case, the unknown works all belong to Robert Gould (1) but can't, apparently, be allocated to him. I have left a disambiguation note to that effect, but is there a tidier way of managing the problem?

138StephenBarkley
Nov 9, 2011, 2:41pm Top

Thanks for the replies. I added a second line for the editor's role as introduction author (http://www.librarything.com/work/book/79763001). brightcopy, I like that simple UI tweak to make the multiple roles more immediately obvious.

139prosfilaes
Nov 9, 2011, 5:01pm Top

#133: When I saw the problem, it was with Beowulf having every secondary translator also having an introduction. For a work that will ultimately have about a 100 translators, putting almost everyone on two lines is a big deal. I'm of the opinion that listing the author or translator or editor as writing the introduction is silly; it's not news.

140aulsmith
Nov 9, 2011, 7:38pm Top

139: I agree. Now, if they also happened to illustrate it, that would be note-worthy.

I'm still torn about what to do when they both edited and translated, as both seem to be significant, note-worthy jobs.

141Crypto-Willobie
Nov 9, 2011, 8:43pm Top

> 137
I think this problem has been noted in other cases and is being worked on. Eventually those Other Authors will show up on a split author page and then can be assigned to the right one.

143ringman
Nov 10, 2011, 3:58pm Top

For cases where an author has written a book under a pseudonym, and it has been later published under his own name, a written as role would be useful.

examples:
Edmund Cooper (primary) Richard Avery (written as)
Ian Rankin (Primary) Jack Harvey (Written as)
John Creasey (Primary) J. J. Marric (written as)

144rsterling
Edited: Nov 10, 2011, 4:23pm Top

143 - But in those cases, the author and pseudonym would be combined (normally, unless there's more than one person with the name), so adding the pseudonym it would just show the same author name twice (linked to the same author page).

I agree, though, that it would be nice to be able to enter pseudonymn info. Maybe if the "free text" part of the "other" role starts working for primary authors, that could be a place to enter that information. That would probably need discussion, though.

145ringman
Nov 11, 2011, 5:50am Top

Further exmple:
Henry Kuttner (Primary)
C. L. Moore (Main, all editions)
Lewis Padgett (written as)

146andyl
Nov 11, 2011, 11:16am Top

Looks like a few people are getting things wrong despite msg #17

http://www.librarything.com/work/11033790
http://www.librarything.com/work/6717916 - role reads author but should be contributor

http://www.librarything.com/work/121238
http://www.librarything.com/work/398457
http://www.librarything.com/work/95021
http://www.librarything.com/work/120785 - no roles but should obviously be contributors

147timspalding
Nov 11, 2011, 11:26am Top

Jeremy, can you think about wording and prompting?

Do people think there's a way we can improve the Helper log to help with this? Oh, and we should probably link to the helper log in this context, I think.

148andyl
Nov 11, 2011, 11:39am Top

Tim,

Would it be possible to have an update to say how well this is going. How many roles have been confirmed.

Maybe add "Other Authors" to the helpers zeitgeist and award badges.. Having positive feedback mechanisms really helps keep people's enthusiasm up.

149rsterling
Edited: Nov 11, 2011, 1:05pm Top

147 - The helper's log is a little overwhelming with the volume of information. If you could include the roles, that would be helpful. (ETA I see roles are already there.) It would also be nice if we could further filter the log by primary and secondary.

Is it still not possible to set "other" as a role, with free text? That might open up a huge can of worms, I guess, since people might put all kinds of things there. I was looking for it to put "director" for some films that are on LT. Maybe we just need a longer list of roles?

150rsterling
Edited: Nov 11, 2011, 1:01pm Top

One thing that I've also seen is people adding "author" to a primary and main authors, when there are only authors, no other people/roles for that book.

An example would be:
History of Blah Blah
by Jane Smith (author) and Joe Black (author)

Unless there's also an editor, translator, etc. who is also primary and could be misunderstood as the author, I don't think there's any need to put "author" in. "Author" is assumed as default.

151brightcopy
Nov 11, 2011, 1:06pm Top

#150 by rsterling> I think setting them as author instead of "--" is better. I don't know, I guess I'm just seems better to be specific. Tim said in #30 that he's planning on omitting "(author)" when there's only one author and no other non-author roles. Perhaps he could extend that logic to omitting "(author)" when all the authors have that role.

I also think it shouldn't be possible to save "--" as a role. That would clear up the problem of what to do with some "author" and some "---" roles mixed together.

152andyl
Nov 11, 2011, 2:10pm Top

#151

I agree, I have been setting them as author.

153rsterling
Edited: Nov 12, 2011, 8:59pm Top

141 - I'd be ok with it if Tim could hide it when there are no other kinds of "main" authors. But as it is now, I find that it needlessly clutters the top of the page. It seems self-evident that the names after "by" are authors, unless otherwise indicated.

It's also resulting in some other strange things, e.g. on this page:
http://www.librarything.com/author/halljamesnorman

Works by James Norman Hall
Bounty Trilogy (also Author) 372 copies, 4 reviews
The Hurricane (also Author) 16 copies

(Yes, we know he's the author, because the work is in his "works by" section.)

ETA: note that this redundant "also Author" thing is only happening for "main" authors, not primary ones, as far as I can tell.

154brightcopy
Nov 12, 2011, 9:06pm Top

#153 by rsterling> All those problems just sound like places where Tim should touch-up the display code, not ones where we should bend the roles so that things "look right." It's like when people kept saying to enter canonical names as "King Jr., Martin Luther" instead of focusing on entering the data correctly ("King, Martin Luther, Jr.") and pestering Tim to fix the display.

And no, it's not self-evident that if left as "--", the role is "author". The reason why is because all the scads of books that haven't had someone spend the time to assign "editor" or "photographer", etc. to them. The only thing you can truly assume from a blank role is that no one has set it.

155rsterling
Edited: Nov 12, 2011, 10:34pm Top

not ones where we should bend the roles so that things "look right."
I'm not suggesting that. If the consensus is that all authors must have a role, then I'd like the display to be fixed. However, I personally don't think there's any need to put "author" (in cases where there aren't other author roles). That's not bending the roles. That's just keeping the status quo (no role designation or display) for books with simple author roles, and using the new feature as an add on where there's a need to specify additional roles.

As to your second point, yes, I fully understand that right now, we need to set the author roles for cases where the author isn't an author. But if I see Hamlet, by William Shakespeare on a work page, I see absolutely no need to add author as a role.

156trollsdotter
Nov 14, 2011, 7:52pm Top

Will "CK: Other Authors" be added to the fields available in the Styles? I'd like to be able to see where I left off in updating anthology series.

157rsterling
Nov 14, 2011, 9:39pm Top

156 Do you mean in the catalog?

I'd rather work-level "other authors" were not made a catalog column. There's already an other authors column for one's own book, and I think this would just create more confusion (and likely many mistakes).

158trollsdotter
Nov 14, 2011, 10:14pm Top

>157 rsterling:
Yes, that's it. It doesn't have to be there in one of the default styles (I don't even know what the defaults are anymore). With it clearly labeled "CK..." like all the other CK fields I don't see that it's any more confusing than common knowledge fields on the work page.

159brightcopy
Nov 14, 2011, 11:06pm Top

#157 by rsterling> Somehow we have CK:Canonical Title in addition to book title and manage to cope. I think we'd do just fine with CK:Other Authors. ;)

160rsterling
Nov 14, 2011, 11:56pm Top

Technically, other authors isn't part of CK. It doesn't show up in the CK history, and isn't in the CK section, and I suspect it's a different database.

Maybe I just spend too much time cleaning up CK mistakes. There's been a fair amount of debate about whether CK should be editable from the catalog, too, but never enough to tip the balance against it. But I can see more possibility for harm than good in putting other authors in catalog view.

161brightcopy
Nov 15, 2011, 12:51am Top

#160 by rsterling> I think CK applies to Other Authors. Is it a different structure? Sure. (Well, I assume so.) But it's still Common Knowledge.

Personally, I'd want it for many of the reasons already stated above. When walking through your catalog to see how much you've completed in working on a task like filling in all the other authors for a bunch of graphic novels, anthologies, etc. you have, it's crucial.

162rsterling
Edited: Nov 16, 2011, 2:43pm Top

With cases like this

http://www.librarything.com/work/6033556
"People Before Property: A Real Estate Primer and Research Guide
by Unknown, Community Research and Publications Group"

shouldn't we be changing the primary author, rather than adding the correct author as an additional author?

I think there's a real need for more guidelines on how to use this new feature - and more discussion, to get to those guidelines. The thread I started about using other authors vs. aliasing/splitting didn't really get off the ground, but I really think we need some community discussion and consensus about how to use primary and other author changes.

For instance, what are the cases where the primary author should vs. shouldn't be changed?
-- cases like "unknown," last-name only - definitely change primary author when the correct author can be determined, e.g. via worldcat (and, I think, change primary author rather than any other solution like aliasing, etc.)
I'm sure there are lots of other cases, though, where primary author changes should be the last resort, or shouldn't be used at all. Any thoughts on what some of those would be?

Or, what problems do we need to look out for in using other/primary authors?
-- It's a good idea, IMO, to check for any possible combinations *before* adding other authors. If a one-copy work has the authors changed, and later gets combined with the rest of the copies, then the author change is going to carry over into the combination, resulting in things like authors listed twice, etc.

163eromsted
Nov 22, 2011, 10:09pm Top

Any more thought given to an option to mass confirm or edit potential other authors (as mentioned in #13, #30 and #32 above). I have some works with many, many contributors and it would be nice to have a faster method of confirmation and editing some to all editions.

164birder4106
Nov 23, 2011, 2:27am Top

#163

Yes please

165mattardo
Dec 28, 2011, 4:22am Top

Pardon me - all this information is just wonderful, but I really would love to see all these authors - all of the contributors, etc. - appear under my main Authors Tab under Your Books, and then Authors. I have many scholarly anthologies with contributors galore who also have authored standalone books as single authors, so I really would like to see at a glance the number of works the particular person (no matter WHAT his capacity in the work had been) was involved in under Your Books - Authors. None of the sub-contributors show up under this page, and I was really, really hoping they would.

Am I missing something, or is this in the works, or not even a consideration?
:)

166jbd1
Dec 28, 2011, 5:29am Top

>165 mattardo: - I'm pretty sure that's one of the places these still need to be factored in. I've got a list at the office of some of the various places we still need to connect the new other authors data.

167mattardo
Dec 31, 2011, 3:20pm Top

That would be fantastic! I find myself entering a large list of contributors for many books that contain scholarly essays, and I would love to see these mini-authors get their due in the "big picture". :) It would help me keep track of an author, and what works s/he has written, conributed to, translated, etc.

168Crypto-Willobie
Dec 31, 2011, 5:00pm Top

>167 mattardo:

Maybe you already realize this, and you just long for the convenience of being able to access this info from your Your Books page, but by entering the contributors etc under Add Authors halfway down a title's Work Page you can already "see these mini-authors get their due in the 'big picture'" because that work will then appear on each contributor's author page so that you can "keep track of an author, and what works s/he has written, conributed to, translated, etc."

But it would also be nice to have the Work Page Other Author info migrated into one's Your Books Other Author's field, rather than having to duplicate the work, adding it my hand; and for it to be live-link from Your Books instead of dead as it now is...

169guurtjesboekenkast
Edited: Jun 8, 2012, 8:40pm Top

For the last couple of hours I've been working to get the name Lagerlöf, Selma back as the primairy author. All of a sudden her name is changed into the Russian language, namely: Лагерлёф, Сельма.
See http://www.librarything.com/author/lagerlfselma . I have changed a lot of those thanslations, after first checking the edition page, to see that it was really Selma Lagerlöf.
What I'm wondering about is how this is possible, because the secondairy author has not been changed into Сельма Лагерлёф. I do not mind that on the Russian site her name is written in Russian, but on the Dutch and the English site het name is also in Russian because I don't understand that language.

edited because of typo

170krazy4katz
Edited: Jun 8, 2012, 9:16pm Top

i pushed recalculate author name and now it seems ok. Click Selma Lagerlöf
Does it look ok for you?

k4k

171guurtjesboekenkast
Jun 9, 2012, 3:11pm Top

>170 krazy4katz:
It looks oke now; thanks a lot krazy4katz.

Guurtje

Group: New features

45,232 messages

This group does not accept members.

About

This topic is not marked as primarily about any work, author or other topic.

About | Contact | Privacy/Terms | Help/FAQs | Blog | Store | APIs | TinyCat | Legacy Libraries | Early Reviewers | Common Knowledge | 138,778,078 books! | Top bar: Always visible