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.

Work/book pages and work- vs. book-level information

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, 3:52pm Top

Prompted by some of the changes here:

Big "other authors" changes (general discussion)
http://www.librarything.com/blogs/librarything/2011/11/big-other-authors-changes...

I've made a preliminary decision about work pages.

The problem is this: The "top" of work pages have traditionally served to show both work and book-level information. Until today, the headline of the page reflected your book's title, which might differ from the work title. Ditto with authors. But after that it showed secondary authors--far, far more important now that the feature is released to all--and series information which is inherently a work-level feature. Then, below, a "Book information" block showed the details from your copy. But nothing showed the work-level information you weren't seeing if it was your book.

The situation was confusing, and has gotten worse with the work-level author changes. Changing the work-level role, for example, might seem to do nothing if your book-level information was not also changed.

Basically, we have to: Separate work and book information physically, making it clear which is which.

My solution--adopted unilaterally and as much to prompt discussion as to avoid it!--has been to make the top of the page a work-level area. That is, it now reflects all work-level data, not a mix of work- and book-level data. Your book-level data, meanwhile, appears in the "Book information" box below that. It's my belief that that box need to be better—to include all the secondary authors, for example.

Now, we can do all this in a couple of ways.

1. My way, which is simple.
2. The reverse of my way—book-level info on the top and add a new "work info" box, when necessary.
3. Some sort of toggle, so people can always see it their way, or whatever.
4. Whatever you think.

Thanks for your consideration.

2brightcopy
Nov 1, 2011, 4:49pm Top

Can we do RSIs here? In particular, I'm thinking a catalog field to that shows all the work authors (as opposed to book that you have now) in one field. Sorting would be by "primary" author (as outlined in your other post).

Back to the main topic (which has been ignored so far amongst the other authors joy): I think, in general, I'm fine with this. The main place I care that it use my titles and authors is probably my catalog listing. On the actual work pages, I can understand there's more of a balance between having a "standard" listing for a work, no matter how you catalog your own copy.

Plus, it'll piss off the perfume catalogers when all their perfumes get combined together into one work at the work title is identically "Perfumes for Inconsiderate Jerks".

*run*

3Jarandel
Nov 1, 2011, 7:24pm Top

I'd say 2. or 3., now having over half my catalog (translations from english to X, or IMO much worse, works in another original language flooded copies-wise by their english translations, or where I just get slammed with the english canonical title because that's the version of the site I'm using) prominently displaying a title that's not the one I can find on my shelves does not make me a happy panda.

Making work-level stuff displayed is nice, though actually you could already access it before by merely trimming the url a bit.

4eromsted
Nov 1, 2011, 7:51pm Top

I have no objection to having the canonical work information at the top of the work page.

But how about putting the user's information at the top of the book details page?

5_Zoe_
Nov 1, 2011, 8:15pm Top

I'd love to get rid of the book information box from the work pages. I don't think it ever belonged there, though it does have some useful buttons in the header. There's a book details page for book details.

The title and cover are more problematic. I'd really prefer to see my own on the main page. It's a basic part of identifying what book I'm looking at.

6timspalding
Nov 1, 2011, 9:56pm Top

Making work-level stuff displayed is nice, though actually you could already access it before by merely trimming the url a bit.

Not so, actually. The work page picked your book for its data, if you had one.

But how about putting the user's information at the top of the book details page?

Maybe. I like having them all the same--the stable part of the whole suite of pages. It would be weird if the same global navigation--Main page, cover page, reviews, etc., changed the top wording, cover image and etc.

I'd love to get rid of the book information box from the work pages. I don't think it ever belonged there, though it does have some useful buttons in the header. There's a book details page for book details. ... The title and cover are more problematic. I'd really prefer to see my own on the main page. It's a basic part of identifying what book I'm looking at.

Right. But I think that, for Jarandel at least, that's also true of the title.

7_Zoe_
Nov 1, 2011, 10:31pm Top

It would be weird if the same global navigation--Main page, cover page, reviews, etc., changed the top wording, cover image and etc.

Well, if you're going to keep it consistent everywhere, I would stick with the user's own title and cover.

For everything else, I'd divide more sharply between the book and the work --no personal book information on the work page.

8leahbird
Nov 1, 2011, 11:15pm Top

Well, if you're going to keep it consistent everywhere, I would stick with the user's own title and cover.

i have to concur. i've spent a lot of time making sure my personal information is correct and it's a bit despairing to see it reverted to generic data.

9timspalding
Nov 1, 2011, 11:20pm Top

>7 _Zoe_:,8

You guys are actually disagreeing. Zoe wants no book data on the work page—exactly what we've now done, except also removing the "Book information" box. Atlargeintheworld wants their data superseding the work-level data.

10_Zoe_
Edited: Nov 1, 2011, 11:25pm Top

No, I make an exception for the major top-page data. I want no minor book data in any of the subsections, but I'd be happier if the basic title, author, and cover were my own.

ETA: I'm not actually sure about author.

11_Zoe_
Nov 1, 2011, 11:30pm Top

Trying to think of how to explain this. There are the basic identifiers of the work (title, cover) that show what work we're talking about. It makes sense for those to be the ones that are recognizable to me. Then there's the extra information, which I think should be divided by book and work. I want the basic labels on the page to be recognizable, so I immediately know what work I'm looking at, but beyond that there's no need for book-level data on the work page.

12Heather19
Edited: Nov 2, 2011, 1:22am Top

I (think) I agree with Zoe.

I could definitely do without the "Scholastic (1993), Hardcover, 1 pages" detail-stuff in the book-information box on the main work page It's clunky and don't do much and... yeah.

But the title is definitely frustrating me. I own books that are written primarily in another language, or that are re-released under different titles, and seeing a completely strange title that is *not* mine at the top of the work-page is definitely frustrating.

13SugarCreekRanch
Nov 2, 2011, 1:36am Top

I agree with Zoe.

14brightcopy
Nov 2, 2011, 1:44am Top

Yeah, given the examples people are giving, I think I'm going to have to flip my "I'm fine with it" to "that'd be annoying."

I also think I'll repost some of my thoughts that were posted to the "split authors" thread but have more to do with this issue. Stricken text is stuff that's pretty much already been covered.

---

My take on what needs to be done (sorry for all the capitals but I won't to be clear on the book/work distinction):

1) "Other Authors" needs to change to just "Authors". Both primary and secondary author(s) are entered in it. (Henceforth I will refer to this as "WORK Authors")

2) LT needs to better mesh the BOOK author and other authors with the WORK Authors. If my Good Omens BOOK is listed as author:Neil Gaiman and Other author:Terry Pratchett(author role) and the WORK Authors as Neil Gaiman (author) and Terry Pratchett (author), this should show as: "by Neil Gaiman, Terry Pratchett" (I don't think we really need "(author)" in there for authors. Can't we save that for non-author roles only so it'd look a bit neater?)


3) Using the example in #2, if my BOOK author=Terry Pratchett and BOOK Other authors=Neil Gaiman, then the work byline should be "by Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman". Note that the order would follow the order I had them on my BOOK entry. I think this would make people happier and follow the "your book looks like you want it to" principle.

4) Now, the question is, what to do if my BOOK author is Neil Gaiman and I have nothing in for BOOK Other authors. Should LT stick its data on my book's byline? In my opinion, no.

5) Similar to #4, if I have "Neal Gaimen" as my primary author, should LT correct it with the curated "Neil Gaiman", whether that variant is combined into gaimanneil or not? Again, in my opinion, no. This is pretty consistent with the way LT works now already.

6) Should LT stick on an "also under" like it used to to let you know your BOOK authors don't match up with the WORK authors? Not in my opinion.

7) LT should use the BOOK author most frequently listed as the auto-calculated "first" author, if there is WORK Author information for "main" author and it includes that author, or if there is none. Otherwise, the auto-calculation totally blows away the point of curating this information. This also leads to some crappy Amazon "Jane Roe and John Doe" author jumping to the top and having to be dealt with through author split/combine contortions.

So, after all that I proposed, what good is the curated WORK Authors if they'll never show up because your BOOK data will override/mask it? That's a good question. Then again, what's the point of Canonical Title if your title overrides it? I guess part of the answer is that this makes works show up right that you don't have in your catalog. Those can often look terrible, both in terms of titles and authors. It brings down the site in general. Ditto with having works correctly show up on various author pages.

---

15prosfilaes
Nov 2, 2011, 2:03am Top

I certainly like seeing the new authors. There's a number of books where I filled in more information than I have in the author fields, since they weren't doing me any good in author fields.

16vivir
Nov 2, 2011, 2:17am Top

The work/book title is now very confusing. About half of my books are in Finnish and half in English, and I have lots of works in both languages. Now it's difficult to see quickly which book I'm actually looking at.

And it kind of hurts to see Seitsemän veljestä by Aleksis Kivi (Finland's national author) to show up as Seven Brothers, or Kalevala (the national epic of Finland) as The Kalevala.

17r.orrison
Nov 2, 2011, 4:00am Top

I'll come down on the side of preferring Book info when possible. Tim, I think you're seeing this from the LibraryThing point of view, where the amassed curated information is most interesting, and most likely to be right. But for members, this is their catalog of their books, and not seeing the title and author they entered when they look at a book's page seems wrong (and here I'm intentionally blurring the book/work distinction).

18Mareofthesea
Edited: Nov 2, 2011, 4:06am Top

I'm not sure I understand or appreciate this change. There are several changes to my catalogue now which I do not agree with. I had spent a considerable amount of time cleaning up my book titles, and now to see that gone is a disapointment.

If we could possibly incorporate a setting so individual users can decide how to view their works that would be the best solution imo.

19_Zoe_
Nov 2, 2011, 8:39am Top

I could definitely do without the "Scholastic (1993), Hardcover, 1 pages" detail-stuff in the book-information box on the main work page It's clunky and don't do much and... yeah.

But the title is definitely frustrating me. I own books that are written primarily in another language, or that are re-released under different titles, and seeing a completely strange title that is *not* mine at the top of the work-page is definitely frustrating.


Yup, this.

20eromsted
Nov 2, 2011, 8:49am Top

>11 _Zoe_:
Logically and aesthetically I tend to agree with Zoë on having a greater distinction between the work page and the book page. Thing is, functionally I use the book information box on the work page all the time.

For me the main search is much faster than the catalog search. If I want to change a few tags or shift a book from one collection to another it's easier to do a site search and make the changes on the work page. Removing that box would mean extra clicks on these operations.

On the main question: it's probably an indication of spending too much time here, but I'm so ingrained into the LT work/edition/book logic that I don't really see the work page as being about my book. So I don't care what it says at the top of the work page as long as there's somewhere else for me to see the data I have entered for my book.

21_Zoe_
Nov 2, 2011, 8:51am Top

If we do have to keep the Book Information box, I hope it can at least be made moveable so that those of us who mainly want to prioritize work information can get it out of the way.

22hailelib
Nov 2, 2011, 9:04am Top

I'm another person who uses the book information box a lot and like it near the top of the main page.

23aulsmith
Nov 2, 2011, 9:16am Top

I like it the way it is now. I found it very annoying not to see the work level information (the previous view) and equally annoying not to see my information (the view before that). This view shows me both.

(I'm not understanding the complaints of people whose "correct" data is now messed up. The data you entered in your catalog (which is correct for your book, but not necessarily mine) is in the book information. The crowd sourced data (which, while not particularly nice looking, does represent what most of us have in our catalogs) is at the top of the page. Nothing about your data has changed except it's placement on the page.)

24jjwilson61
Nov 2, 2011, 10:02am Top

6) Should LT stick on an "also under" like it used to to let you know your BOOK authors don't match up with the WORK authors? Not in my opinion.

If you're not going to put the work title and author at the top then I think it needs to be somewhere above the fold of the work page. It is after all the WORK page and that information needs to be somewhere. Probably not labeled with "also under" which was always confusing. How about labeling the work title and work author(s)?

25MarthaJeanne
Edited: Nov 2, 2011, 10:49am Top

I really like having access quickly to both the work data and my book data. I prefer the new setup to what we had before, but I agree that it is not yet optimal. For one thing, there are now pages where my data do not show up.

I guess what I would like best would be my title and author at the top with the work title and author right below them, and this on all the pages.

I suspect that a lot more books will get Canonical Titles with the work title more promenent.

26timspalding
Nov 2, 2011, 10:56am Top

Okay, those of you who want book information again must decide where the work info goes. Works have titles, authors, other authors, series and so forth. Shall we add a "work info" box, similar to the "book info" box when you have the book?

I found it very annoying not to see the work level information (the previous view) and equally annoying not to see my information (the view before that). This view shows me both.

Right. That's my feeling too. All the information is there now. In various circumstances, that's important.

I really like having access quickly to both the work data and my book data. I prefer the new setup to what we had before, but I agree that it is not yet optimal. For one thing, there are now pages where my data do not show up.

What pages?

27MarthaJeanne
Edited: Nov 2, 2011, 11:07am Top

All the pages except the main page, edit your book and book details. My book is called Mein liebes Fräulein Mozart

The covers page:
http://www.librarything.com/work/3377392/covers/78680910

Work Details
http://www.librarything.com/work/3377392/workdetails/78680910

Reviews
http://www.librarything.com/work/3377392/reviews/78680910

Recommendations
Members
Descriptions
Conversations
Common Knowledge
Popularity
Editions

28_Zoe_
Nov 2, 2011, 11:07am Top

I'd rather have a toggle. The problem with having "all the information" right there is that it takes up valuable space.

Under no circumstances do I want another immovable box on the page.

At this point, I'd really prefer for you to rethink the whole page from scratch, with customization foremost in mind.

29timspalding
Nov 2, 2011, 11:09am Top

All the pages except the main page, edit your book and book details. My book is called Mein liebes Fräulein Mozart

Got it. I thought you meant all pages, including the main page.

At this point, I'd really prefer for you to rethink the whole page from scratch, with customization foremost in mind.

There is no way in hell a rethink would draw anything but swift and total condemnation. The principle thing people care about isn't what's best but what they had before. Whatever they had is sacrosanct, whatever they didn't ephemeral. Sorry, but that's just UI design with users 101.

30brightcopy
Nov 2, 2011, 11:11am Top

#26 by timspalding> Okay, those of you who want book information again must decide where the work info goes. Works have titles, authors, other authors, series and so forth. Shall we add a "work info" box, similar to the "book info" box when you have the book?

Why not the Work Details page ONLY? Wasn't that the only place it showed up before for how many years?

31timspalding
Edited: Nov 2, 2011, 11:14am Top

No, series information was mixed in, and since May we've had other-authors information. We also had the line about your author not agreeing with the work-level author, if that was the case.

More generally, the main work page is the main work page. Putting book information about work information and then repeating it below. Because I'll be damned if I'm going to get rid of Book Information, which is an easy way to edit the stuff people care about most—tags, collections, reviews—and is the only way to switch between multiple books within the same work.

32brightcopy
Nov 2, 2011, 11:14am Top

#29 by timspalding> The principle thing people care about isn't what's best but what they had before. Whatever they had is sacrosanct, whatever they didn't ephemeral. Sorry, but that's just UI design with users 101.

Oversimplifying a bit, no? Isn't there some weight to the fact that at one point you chose to have the book title/author be the one shown at the top of work pages, and you didn't just randomly pull it out of your ass but had some kind of reasoning for it? And that for however many years it was that way, you didn't see people clamoring in RSI demanding that the work title/author be what shows at the top of the work page? And believe me, we in RSI like to clamor.

33timspalding
Nov 2, 2011, 11:17am Top

As I said, the impetus was the accumulation of stuff up there, clashing with the book-level information. First there were series. Then work-level other authors. Soon we will have to somehow communicate the notion of work > edition > book. I think we'd be better of clarifying things by rendering LibraryThing's core conceptual framework of work > (edition) > book into parallel top-down interface.

34_Zoe_
Nov 2, 2011, 11:18am Top

The principle thing people care about isn't what's best but what they had before. Whatever they had is sacrosanct, whatever they didn't ephemeral. Sorry, but that's just UI design with users 101.

Well, so much for the "prompting discussion" line. It sounded nice at the time, but it always seems to come back to "users are idiots".

Isn't there some weight to the fact that at one point you chose to have the book title/author be the one shown at the top of work pages, and you didn't just randomly pull it out of your ass but had some kind of reasoning for it? And that for however many years it was that way, you didn't see people clamoring in RSI demanding that the work title/author be what shows at the top of the work page? And believe me, we in RSI like to clamor.

Yes.

35brightcopy
Nov 2, 2011, 11:20am Top

#33 by timspalding> Sounds like a lot of "foolish consistency" to me.

:P

36MarthaJeanne
Nov 2, 2011, 11:36am Top

Actually I remember quite recently clamoring to be able to see the work author.

37_Zoe_
Edited: Nov 2, 2011, 11:43am Top

I should clarify that by "rethink from scratch", I just mean deliberately consider the position of each thing. Why is A above B, etc.?

This doesn't automatically mean the whole page will be completely different. If you rethink everything and conclude that the current arrangement makes sense, great. No harm done.

If you rethink everything and can't really justify why some things are given priority, then I'm not very impressed by the argument that the status quo is important just because users don't like change.

And since inevitably people won't agree on what's important, you need more customization.

38brightcopy
Nov 2, 2011, 11:47am Top

#36 by MarthaJeanne> Actually I remember quite recently clamoring to be able to see the work author.

Right, but to have it replace book author on your work screen? I must have missed that one. And I typically read all the clamors.

39timspalding
Nov 2, 2011, 11:49am Top

>37 _Zoe_:

Well, you know my philosophy. We should aim for the best solution and I should not try to "buy assent" for that general solution by offering customization. I mean, sometimes I feel like I could get general assent to turn the work page into a giant JPEG of a turd, so long as I gave people an opt-out.

40timspalding
Nov 2, 2011, 11:50am Top

Okay, here's my idea:

1. Top part goes back to book data, and if no book data then work data.
2. Series is kept up there, inconsistent in a way but there.
3. "Book information" (see graphic) is changed to "Bibliographic." If there is book data, it has toggles to show book data, work data or both. When editions come along, it will be book, edition, work.

41brightcopy
Nov 2, 2011, 11:51am Top

#40 by timspalding> I like, for the most part. My only ornamentation would be maybe something that says "Your copies", "Your entries" (I don't have a really good strong phrase sticking in my mind) that makes it clear what you're seeing. I think that'll become extra important when you stick editions in.

42_Zoe_
Nov 2, 2011, 12:04pm Top

>39 timspalding: Yeah, I know. But I think there's been a lot of divergence in the most basic idea of what the work page is since I started using LibraryThing, and I'm not sure the various positions can be reconciled. The whole concept of using the work page as a convenient place for editing our personal book data (tags, etc.) is fairly new, and in my mind antithetical to the whole concept of a work page. I can edit my books in the catalogue, or on the edit page. If these things are failing for some reason (the catalogue search is too slow, the edit page is too hideous and poorly-organized), the solution should be to address those failings, not to add quick-edit links on the work page.

But you saw how you responded when I suggested a complete rethink. No way in hell. So if we're basically stuck with the random agglomeration that is the status quo, increased customization is the next best option.

That said, I largely agree with your proposal in #40. I just hope you'll remove the Other Authors link and give us an option to move around the Bibliographic section like any other section.

43brightcopy
Nov 2, 2011, 12:05pm Top

Of course, what hasn't been discussed here (oh dear) is one thing I'd actually like to have: the ability to default my book data to the work data. This isn't as much an issue for titles, but now that we have all these other authors, it's a shame to have to choose between all the effort of entering all the data for every book you have. I'm sure this is part of what motivated your decision to move the work title/authors to the top. I have a bunch of anthologies, and it'd be great if I didn't have to go in and enter all the contributors in my book's Other Authors and get all their roles right, since someone has already done that at the work level. It's a bit of a catch-22, I think. Maybe a power edit feature to copy other authors and/or titles from work level to book level?

44_Zoe_
Nov 2, 2011, 12:08pm Top

>43 brightcopy: I'd like this too.

And maybe at some point we can just add generic editions from the work data? ;)

45timspalding
Nov 2, 2011, 12:14pm Top

That said, I largely agree with your proposal in #40. I just hope you'll remove the Other Authors link and give us an option to move around the Bibliographic section like any other section.

Yes and yes, if people are okay with it.

46_Zoe_
Nov 2, 2011, 12:35pm Top

Yay, thanks!

Vote: This is okay

Current tally: Yes 9, No 6, Undecided 4

47aulsmith
Nov 2, 2011, 1:17pm Top

45/46: I'm sorry. I don't understand what's being proposed. Here's the picture I get:

Top of page: If the book is in my catalog, this is the data from my catalog. If not, it's the work data. It will include the series information.

Next: a box, labelled bibliographical data which will toggle (eventually) among the work data, the edition data, and the data from my catalog (where I can make simple changes to the data)

Somewhere in one of those views is a link to the Other Authors below?

Please clarify.

48_Zoe_
Nov 2, 2011, 1:42pm Top

"Important" (i.e., all-editions) other authors will also be shown at the top, as far as I know.

The poll is about two changes:
1) Allow the Bibliographic Info box to be moved around on the page, like most other subsections.
2) Remove the link to the Other Authors subsection. In a book like Moonwalking with Einstein that has no "important" other authors, but a narrator for some editions (the audiobook), there's now a link at the top of the page that goes to the Other Authors section.

49lilithcat
Nov 2, 2011, 1:56pm Top

> 48

I completely disagree with your characterization of those whose contributions are not to "all-editions" as "not important". The fact that the contribution is not "primary" or "main" does not mean that it is not an important one. And, indeed, many "all-editions" contributors are not authors, and will not, therefore, be shown at the top.

50_Zoe_
Nov 2, 2011, 1:57pm Top

>49 lilithcat: It's called the "work" page for a reason. Or at least, I used to think there was a reason. See my earlier comments about whether the whole thing needs a re-think.

51brightcopy
Nov 2, 2011, 2:00pm Top

#50 by _Zoe_> Yes, but unfortunately it's the link that you get when you click on your "book". So there's muddling there, as you yourself have pointed out before with your comments on a rethink.

52_Zoe_
Nov 2, 2011, 2:06pm Top

>51 brightcopy: Yeah. So I still think we need a re-think. What's the point of this page? What information deserves to be on it? What deserves to be at the very top?

53jjwilson61
Edited: Nov 2, 2011, 2:09pm Top

And how should it be presented so that it's clear at a glance that it's a page about the work and not a member's own book, despite the fact that they can get to it by clicking on their book in the catalog.

54brightcopy
Nov 2, 2011, 3:53pm Top

Just thinking out loud, here:



(click image for larger version)

55timspalding
Nov 2, 2011, 3:56pm Top

No, I thought of that. That's sort of my idea, except compressed into one thing. But I think others are going to object at how much space has been taken-up.

56brightcopy
Edited: Nov 2, 2011, 4:02pm Top

#55 by timspalding> Oh, okay. I didn't get that from 40.

ETA: And note that at the top, that's book title AND author/other authors.

57brightcopy
Nov 2, 2011, 4:03pm Top

#55 by timspalding> And I think the objections will probably be tempered by the fact that you've already written configuration code to collapse/rearrange those section, though you may loathe it.

58_Zoe_
Nov 2, 2011, 4:04pm Top

If we can move them around and they stay moved, it's not really a problem.

More generally, I'd like the process of customizing the work page to be more like customizing the home page, where we can not just move modules but hide them altogether and even customize the ones that do show. I promise I'll still suggest defaults.

59timspalding
Nov 2, 2011, 4:07pm Top

though you may loathe it

I do.

The book-info box is now moveable, however.

60_Zoe_
Nov 2, 2011, 4:10pm Top

>59 timspalding: Thanks. The settings are still remembered by computer rather than by account, though, right? Changes never seem to stick.

61timspalding
Nov 2, 2011, 4:13pm Top

I think it's by computer, but persisting.

62brightcopy
Nov 2, 2011, 4:13pm Top

#60 by _Zoe_> This is probably getting off on a tangent, but I thought the "forgetting the customization" problem was done and dusted ages ago.

Now, as far as whether you want that to be computer-by-computer or account-by-account, that's really not a clear-cut answer. Different setups are more appropriate for my desktop, my iPad and my phone.

63_Zoe_
Nov 2, 2011, 4:16pm Top

Well, ideally we could have a setting that specifies whether it's by computer or account ;)

I'm glad to hear that it no longer forgets, anyway; I'll try rearranging things once again.

64_Zoe_
Nov 2, 2011, 4:17pm Top

Oh, but book information comes back even when I move it.

65brightcopy
Nov 2, 2011, 4:28pm Top

#63 by _Zoe_> Uh oh, Tim's going to have to add a new law for how long in a discussion before "the configurability of a configuration option is, itself, configurable."

And then he'll reformat the servers...

66_Zoe_
Nov 2, 2011, 4:28pm Top

:D

67justjim
Nov 2, 2011, 6:24pm Top

>40 timspalding:, >54 brightcopy: You people need to use more tags!

68brightcopy
Nov 2, 2011, 6:31pm Top

#67 by justjim> Meh.

69Heather19
Nov 3, 2011, 12:23am Top

54: Your "thinking out loud" is amazingly detailed.... :P
I really really like it. Collapsible work-detail *and* book-detail sections would be awesome. And am I right that your mock-up uses the book-title on top (since there is a different work-title in the details)? Love it.

I think i'm in the minority that I don't much care about the positions of work-page things, as long as things aren't *removed* or anything. But the top title I definitely care about.

70thorold
Nov 3, 2011, 8:51am Top

I'll add my voice to those who don't like seeing the "work title" in big letters at the top of the page. Especially when it's because my book is in a different language from the version of the site I'm logged into. I don't really understand why you're using the "work title" - it's not as though it's an intrinsic property of the work, is it? It's just the title that wins out for that particular site language.

How about showing something like "Die Blechtrommel {The tin drum}"?

71divinenanny
Nov 4, 2011, 3:41pm Top

Agreeing with 70. Half my books are Dutch, half English. I can't pick a site language that covers most of my collection. Please change the book title back to the actual title of my book. Please.

72markbarnes
Nov 8, 2011, 5:42am Top

Sorry I'm late to the party, but I'd like to add my voice to those who want a return to seeing my book level information at the top of work pages for books that I own. Anything else is inevitably confusing for those of us who edit our book titles to those we are familiar with (a surprising number of calculated titles are just not what most people know the book by). Indeed, I'm not convinced that work information is even necessary when I own the book.

73aulsmith
Nov 8, 2011, 9:23am Top

72: As with most things on LT, there are multiple uses for the work page. I certainly need the work information, whether I own the book or not.

74divinenanny
Nov 8, 2011, 9:41am Top

73: I do too, but the title is something that I consider.... mine somehow. It feels detached to see a book I own, with a prominent title that is not that of my Book. My instinct is to think then that I apparently don't own the book because the title is unfamiliar...

75jjwilson61
Nov 8, 2011, 9:51am Top

74> That's fine and you can see your title in your catalog. But when you click on the book title in your catalog you are taken to the work page which isn't just about your book anymore. I don't see why you feel such ownership to the work page.

76jjwilson61
Nov 8, 2011, 9:57am Top

75> Although I can understand how it's confusing to click on the title of a book in your catalog and be taken to a page with a different title. For that reason I think it should be changed back and I thought from previous conversations on this thread that he was going to do so.

77thorold
Nov 8, 2011, 10:04am Top

It's not a question of ownership, I think: but the work page is the place you go to to edit the catalogue data for your copy of the book: it's confusing and disconcerting to see a different title at the top of the page. I have nothing against the majority title in the site language being shown somewhere on that page, but surely it shouldn't be the dominant information at the top of the page.

I think we will have to enlist the help of all those British J.K. Rowling fans whose philosophers have been replaced by sorcerers...

78jjwilson61
Nov 8, 2011, 10:13am Top

77> I see. I've always edited my data from the catalog page or the edit page (using the pencil icon in the catalog). Editing book data from the work page seems like a category error in the UI on Tim's part to me.

79eromsted
Nov 8, 2011, 10:17am Top

>77 thorold:
work page is the place you go to to edit the catalogue data for your copy

Wait. Wouldn't that be the edit page? There's a direct link to that page from the catalog (the pencil). There's also a direct link to the book details page, the best place to see everything entered for your copy (the catalog card). And on the main work page there's a "Book information" box with your title and authors if you have the book in your catalog.

So I get that many people don't like the work title on the work page, but it strikes me as more an aesthetic complaint than a problem of functional confusion.

80timspalding
Nov 8, 2011, 10:18am Top

Sorry this isn't done yet. My plan is still the same. Much in the way.

81MarthaJeanne
Nov 8, 2011, 10:24am Top

It's a lot easier to click on the title (which is a big link) and know you are getting to the right page than to have to track all the way across the screen, hope you are still on the right line, and then click on the little pencil.

The main work page also gives you access to a lot of other information that isn't right there in the catalogue: who else has it, how it has been tagged... I like looking at that before I edit.

82aulsmith
Nov 8, 2011, 10:42am Top

74-79, 81: My point exactly. The work page (whether for good or ill) is designed for many things. Changing the functions of the page will only lead to protest. However, since it has various uses, one of them having the work information, we're all going to have to live with the work title somewhere on the page. I don't care where it is (well, I guess I'd like it above the fold), but I want it there and labeled as to what it is.

83anglemark
Nov 8, 2011, 11:17am Top

Changing the functions of the page will only lead to protest.

And no other option will make anyone complain you think, in this docile and easily satisfied crowd? ;p

84saltmanz
Nov 8, 2011, 11:26am Top

I'm almost thinking there should be separate "book" and "work" pages (maybe reworked from the "details" pages) and that clicking on any specific book takes you to a book page, whereas clicking on more generic versions (via search or wherever) takes you to the work page. And you can toggle back and forth between the two.

85divinenanny
Nov 8, 2011, 12:02pm Top

84, I always thought that was how it works. When I see in the URL work/########/book/####, then I assume I am on my book page ('my' as in, the book page for exactly my edition, no 'my' as in, I own this page). When I see work/#####, then I assume I am on the general work page.
Maybe that is where my confusion comes from....

86saltmanz
Edited: Nov 8, 2011, 12:19pm Top

@ 85: Right. Currently, the /book/ page and the /work/ page both take you to the "work" page, customized with some of your information if you have that book catalogued.

87divinenanny
Nov 8, 2011, 12:33pm Top

@ 86, Then I would expect my title to show up on the /book/ page, not necessarily the /work/ page.

88saltmanz
Nov 8, 2011, 12:57pm Top

That makes the most sense to me, as well. But right now, your /book/ page is the same as the /work/ page—if you're logged in.

89jjwilson61
Nov 8, 2011, 1:36pm Top

It's also not best practices in UI design to have to look at the URL in order to make sense of what you're seeing.

90brightcopy
Nov 8, 2011, 2:34pm Top

#88 by saltmanz> Unless you have more than one of the same book. If you leave off the /book/ part, LT will pick one of the books you have of the same work and use it as the primary book information. Not sure if it goes on entry date or alphabetical or what. So the page may show up slightly different.

Just a minor quibble.

91_Zoe_
Nov 8, 2011, 5:22pm Top

Sort of a side point, but I think one of the underlying issues here is that the edit page is pretty unpleasant--there are a lot of fields in a pretty arbitrary order, and the input formats allowed are overly rigid. I know I never use it, editing from the Add Books quick edit, from the catalogue, or (in the case of reviews only) from the work page.

92mene
Nov 9, 2011, 5:47pm Top

@91: I always use the edit page... I like that everything I can fill out about one of my books is on one page.

Also, I agree with #16.

93_Zoe_
Nov 9, 2011, 5:48pm Top

>92 mene: Yeah, I know that there are people who use it. But there are also plenty of people who edit from the work page or elsewhere. Why is the edit place not the first place that everyone goes to for editing?

94brightcopy
Nov 9, 2011, 7:09pm Top

#93 by _Zoe_> My experience with LT (and interfaces that allow multiple ways of doing things as a whole) is that everyone will, for whatever reason, decide that different ways of doing things are the "best". And clearly, one isn't objectively "best" since otherwise everyone would do it that way.

Case in point: it blew my mind when there was talk of getting rid of the "Post a new topic" button on the left. Many shouts of "but that's the only way I post new topics!" And yet, I had maybe made a handful of topics that way and hundreds by clicking on the group, then clicking on link in that group.

It's always funny that people tend to be biased in thinking their way of doing it must be the most common way. I wonder what that's based on, given the subset of people using Talk, and the further subset of people responding to a particular thread where the subject comes up.

FYI, I've edited from the catalog maybe once or twice. Otherwise, I always use Edit Book. I just don't find the catalog a very friendly UI, due to double-clicking, lagging, shifty columns, etc.

95jjmcgaffey
Nov 9, 2011, 11:08pm Top

Huh. And I find going to the Edit page (finding the pencil, then waiting for the page to load) annoying and slow - I'd rather just double-click on the actual field I want to change. This is probably because about 90% of my editing, and 99% of what I do in the catalog, is similar changes to a whole bunch of books, rather than changes to multiple fields in one book. When I'm doing that, yeah, the Edit page makes more sense. But when I've entered a batch of books and need to change titles, DDC, comments, etc for all of them - I'd rather run up the page and double-click on each field and deal with all the titles, then all the DDC, then...

(Changing titles - I hate sentence case. It's better than Amazon's gunk, but I still need to edit 99% of my titles...)

96leahbird
Nov 9, 2011, 11:54pm Top

#95 by jjmcgaffey> (Changing titles - I hate sentence case. It's better than Amazon's gunk, but I still need to edit 99% of my titles...)

couldn't agree more. i have to edit soooooo many titles to get better data.

97anglemark
Nov 10, 2011, 4:45am Top

I love sentence case, getting the titles right at once. It's an added bonus with using libraries as the source.

98ABVR
Nov 10, 2011, 6:43am Top

>95 jjmcgaffey:-97 (sentence case in titles)

For anyone who might have doubted that brightcopy's point in >94 brightcopy: extends to cataloging data as well as UI . . . :-)

Group: New features

45,236 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 | 138,820,657 books! | Top bar: Always visible