Edit and reorder sources in Add Books

By popular demand, you can now reorder your Add Books sources.

We've also improved the system in other ways.

Check out the blog post: http://blog.librarything.com/main/2015/09/edit-and-reorder-sources-in-add-books/
Or just go check out Add Books: http://www.librarything.com/addbooks

You may notice other changes. Ignore them, if you can.

Snort. :)

>1 timspalding: It's so shiny and beautiful. I think I love it.

Wait. I'm pretty sure I love it. Thank you!

Yay!

Clicking the yellow warning marker does nothing for me on the latest Firefox on Windows.

Be still my heart!

Hurrah! Thanks!

They're not missing, they're broken. See the "All Sources" page. We're working to get as many as possible working again. (They've been broken for months or years.)

Thank you, Jesus!

Quibble: Why does it now say "Deastore (españa)"? Aside from the fact that Deastore's site has been down for months and months and months, it is (was) an Italian site, not a Spanish one.

>14 Collectorator: Simulposting. Tim's post was 11.

>7 jjwilson61: The yellow badge just shows up when you've added new sources, it shouldn't do anything when you click on it. Or, if I'm misunderstanding, what are you expecting it to do that it's not?

You can click it on the lightbox, to reveal connection details.

>14 Collectorator: I'm like Chicken Man -- I'm Everywhere! I'm Everywhere!

"merging Overcat, Amazon and other sources into one set of results"
Hmmm...

>7 jjwilson61: and >18 timspalding: oh, THAT yellow warning sign. Sorry, was thinking the number that gets highlighted when you add a source.

>9 Collectorator: We're actively working on fixing these broken sources. Once we've fixed everything we can (including reaching out to important ones) we'll work on adding new ones.

If anyone wants to help on that by

1) poking around the internet for up-to-date connection details
and/or
2) contacting their favorite libraries personally

and then

3) posting the connection details to Talk that'd be awesome!

>17 kristilabrie: Kristi beat me to the punch.

>9 Collectorator:

Penn State is still on the available list.

>22 ccatalfo: When broken sources are fixed and new ones added will there be some sort of New Arrivals announcement or list? or will we have to wade though the 700 Sources List to see if anything has changed?

Good point and good question.

Yeah. Unless your a librarian, and a technical librarian, it's not easy. Also, Chris works fast. So I expect some movement on many of these. Many will go away, but others will arrive.

>18 timspalding:

I do not see the yellow warning sign while in the lightbox, and when I do see it (in the list) it is not clickable. Mac, latest Chrome.

>17 kristilabrie: I said yellow warning markers because that's the term that was used in the blog post.

>18 timspalding: I don't see any of those markers at all in the lightbox. Should they be in the Your Sources, Featured, or All Sources section? I believe I had some sources that weren't working but those seem to have been dropped.

>24 Crypto-Willobie: indeed maybe we need a recently updated list.

When I went to /addbooks I noticed that Amazon.com wasn't on my list, even though that's where I've mostly sourced from, but there is a Amazon.de books at the bottom now. I don't recall ever adding Amazon.de as a source (I could have forgotten that I added it at some point, though was it even a source before?). Maybe a bug?

It looks like I can re-add Amazon.com in the lightbox, but ... is there a difference between the Amazon.com books under "Amazonia" and the one under "USA"?

>31 omargosh: Yeah, same thing happened to me. I just went in and re-added Amazon.com books and removed Amazon.de books.

I'm 99% sure the Amazonia and USA listings are the same.

>31 omargosh:
No there is no difference. We simply took all the Amazon entries and grouped(by duplicating) them into a mythical country....welcome to Amazonia!

>33 lorannen: right on

It looks like I can re-add Amazon.com in the lightbox, but ... is there a difference between the Amazon.com books under "Amazonia" and the one under "USA"?

No.

Sorry you lost .com and got Germany. Were you using the German site? You generally use the Spanish, no?

Yeah, same thing happened to me. I just went in and re-added Amazon.com books and removed Amazon.de books.

Uh oh. Okay, must be a bug.

Overcat disappeared from my list!

I found it and re-added it from the "Add from over 700 sources" page, but it should not have disappeared in the first place.

>7 jjwilson61:
>28 lorax:

I have tried both those setups and was not able to reproduce any problems.

Just to be clear, when you click the yellow hazard sign, connection details in a light gray color should appear beneath the sign.

>7 jjwilson61: which version of WIndows?
>28 lorax: which version of MAC?

>37 LT_Ammar:

I'm not getting any details with the yellow hazard sign, either.
Mac 10.6.8, Firefox 40.0.3

>37 LT_Ammar:

When I'm in the lightbox, there isn't even a yellow hazard sign.

When I'm just on the Add Books page, it's there but not clickable. OSX 10.9.5, Chrome 45.0.2454.85.

>37 LT_Ammar:, >39 lorax: What she said.

>35 timspalding: Were you using the German site? You generally use the Spanish, no?

I don't recall ever importing from amazon.de or amazon.es. I have imported lots of Spanish-language books from amazon.com. And in case you meant something else: I use librarything.com, even though I think my profile might be set to use to Spanish. I've logged into librarything.es and .de at different points, but mostly just for testing purposes.

Okay, yeah, wires got crossed and a lot of Amazon.coms ended up as Amazon.de. (I should have checked the overall stats--it was Germany, Germany, Germany!) Anyway, I fixed it.

>42 timspalding:

Danke schön!

New issue ;-) (maybe?). I was just now testing the newly restored Amazon.com search, and accidentally had search input blank. I got a green 'Don't panic' error message. It was a bit jarring. The libraries give me a more helpful 'No results found for ""' message. Not sure if this a regression or not, though.

>43 omargosh: I'm actually not sure if that's a regression or not, but in any case, I'll fix it.

>43 omargosh: I put a fix in to not cause that error to show. Thanks for reporting.

>45 ccatalfo:
Thanks for fixing it!

I restored my list of sources without difficulty (got rid of Amazon.de and Amazon.fr, retrieved Overcat, etc.) but I can't reorder the list on my iPad. Any ideas?

One oddity - the Glasgow School of Art was on my old list, is on my new list but doesn't appear on the full list of options???

*Checks calendar*
So "two weeks" has passed then?

Wow. Time's flown! :)

>47 abbottthomas: uhhh, nice catch!

It should be able to work on mobile/tab devices. But I forgot to include a special script that will make reordering functional on those devices. I will update you as to when the script has been included.

>39 lorax: When I'm in the lightbox, there isn't even a yellow hazard sign.

Woh, that cannot be good. Maybe the image is not being served for some requests? I need to investigate.

When I'm just on the Add Books page, it's there but not clickable. OSX 10.9.5, Chrome 45.0.2454.85.

Its good you brought this up. In the add page, the yellow hazard sign is not supposed to be clickable. Only in the lightbox.

Ok, I need to try figure out whats going on with the sign not appearing or being clickable in the lightbox for some of our users.

Fabulous, thanks!

>50 LT_Ammar: It's just not appearing. I don't believe anyone has said they can see it in the lightbox but it's unclickable.

I'm confused -- I no longer see the Hazard Signs anywhere. Before the Re-Sourcing I could see them in my own list next to non-functioning sources such as Access Pennsylvania or Folger Shakespeare Library. But once the change came all my sources disappeared except for LoC, Overcat, British Library and a couple Amazons. Of course I reinstated desired sources but since non-functioning sources are not included in "The 700" I cannot add any Hazardous Sources. So, since my old ones are gone and none can be added I don't see any hazard signs anywhere, lightbox or no lightbox.

Am I missing something?

Nice, but in the process you somehow seem to have "broken" the search for books in languages other than English on the various Non-English flavours of Amazonia. I have amazon.de, amazon.fr, amazon.co.jp, amazon.co.uk and amazon.com in my source list, and since today, the result list for all of these sources looks the same (e.g. if I just type the name of an author): only listing English editions from amazon.com. I'd expect to find German, French or Japanese editions, respectively, when choosing one of the regional Amazon catalogs, otherwise the feature would be quite pointless.

Out of curiosity, I tried searching for the German book I wanted to add by its ISBN, 978-3-518-42505-3 (Die bezifferte Welt. Wie die Logik der Finanzmärkte das Wissen bedroht by Colin Crouch), but the data set that turned up was quite incomplete, missing, among other details, the author, publisher, number of pages, etc. pp. Strange, isn't it?

Amazon.de doesn't get me results from .de, but they seem to be the same results I get when I do the search with .com.

This makes me happy!

This is wonderful!

Thanks Tim

>55 leselotte: That's odd -- will take a look tomorrow.

Awesome, and totally unexpected. :-D

The only thing that could make this better would be to have the US sources broken down by state, rather than in a 200+-item clump.

As I noted elsewhere, I researched the breakdown of the US Add Books sources by state, and the results are here:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-pCO7CI3eqJSuC7CGDWsuWQg5RO74p5ZfaYoQFmh...

No warranty as to accuracy, but a starting point from which to verify. It would be nice to have the extra granularity in the master list. Something to put on the wishlist?

---------------------

Also, I mentioned elsewhere that I added some Z39.50 sources to the wiki: https://www.librarything.com/wiki/index.php/New_book_sources

In particular, I'd practically kill to have the Toronto Public Library onboard, since they're the main repository for IBBY's Outstanding Books for Young People with Disabilities, which I'm planning to finish adding. I'd really prefer not to have to add all those Braille, Bliss, Tactile, etc. books manually. ;-)

Details:

Host name: symphony.torontopubliclibrary.ca
Port: 2200
Database Name: unicorn
Search Map Name: unicorn_bth
Unicode Server: yes

Is state-by-state the best? Why not by type—school, college, university, public?

I'd go for that so long as the states were also provided for some of the more obscure entries. (They are already for some, but not for others).

Also, state-by-state does have the advantage of providing smaller sub-lists -- otherwise, the majority will tend to cluster on the college/university end. And with certain types of books, geography is very important, as I found working on various state awards (some winners of which may be found in perhaps 20 libraries within a state's boundaries and nowhere at all outside of them.)

Since the list is already sorted geographically, unless we want to do a re-think on the sorting methods globally, it seems to make more sense to continue subdividing geographically. Even if we leave things alphabetical, state designations (perhaps square-bracketed) will be helpful. As things stand, I can't even determine which of four possible institutions "Bethel College" refers to: there are two institutions currenly bearing that name (in Kansas and Indiana), as well as two named "Bethel University" (in Minnesota and Tennessee) that were called "Bethel College" until 2004 and 2009, respectively. Considering that we have in the list "Chowan College" which has been known as "Chowan University" since 2006, I'd say there's a 4-way ambiguity to be untangled. Not to mention that nobody outside of Wisconsin would be likely to know that "Northern Waters Library Service" is located in that state, et cetera...

>59 ccatalfo: Thanks! Tried again this morning (on the computer at work), and I still get the exact same results, in the same order, from both .de and .com.

By the way, I searched for "vargas llosa julia", which should, in German, have given me both "Tante Julia und der Schreibkünstler" as well as "Tante Julia und der Kunstschreiber", in various editions.

Out of curiosity, I tried searching for the German book I wanted to add by its ISBN, 978-3-518-42505-3 (Die bezifferte Welt. Wie die Logik der Finanzmärkte das Wissen bedroht by Colin Crouch), but the data set that turned up was quite incomplete, missing, among other details, the author, publisher, number of pages, etc. pp. Strange, isn't it?

We are working on the problem that Amazon.de seems to return Amazon.com results. It seems there's a bug.

But this example isn't anything we can fix. The Amazon data is missing the author and so forth. It's crappy record, no doubt first entered by a used seller who didn't care much about it. I wish there were some way to call these out, if not remove them entirely. But there isn't.

>7 jjwilson61:
>28 lorax:
>52 jjwilson61:

ehm, yeeeeaaaahhhh....so that bug was happening because I had a small piece of code checking to only show that sign to our admin users.

Mind you, this was done weeks ago. I just removed it, so, everybody should now be seeing the yellow hazard sign....because I saw the sign and it opened up my eyes and I am.... yeah Ill stop now. :)

>54 kaixo: OK, this one has been fixed! Thanks.

>47 abbottthomas:

Should be working for mobile/tab devices now.

Thanks for reporting!

>66 timspalding: Individuals can fix crappy data on the various Amazons (if they are registered). Once you get a rep for suggesting changes, they sometimes get processed within hours. Of course, this is a never-ending task, but does have the benefit of stopping more crappy data being pulled into LT in the future. I recommend not getting addicted to doing this.

>70 Noisy: one (lt) correction addiction is enough.

>70 Noisy: Is that why I get answers so fast? The idea of having a 'reputation' at Amazon is somehow scary. I only do it when I've had to fix crappy data in the process of combining, but it does tend to happen 2-3 times a month.

>9 Collectorator: In May 2014, ACCESS Penn restricted their z39.50 connection to just the AP participants. http://bit.ly/1OqJToU

>73 lesmel: Pity. They were a useful resource.

>68 kristilabrie: Thanks for fixing it so quickly. Works again as expected.

>69 LT_Ammar: Just reordered my list - works fine. Thank you so much for the prompt fix.

>69 LT_Ammar: Yes! Wonderful.

All the translated names for sources, why are they only used in the lightbox on localized sites, and not on the Add Books page?

I'd despaired of this ever happening! So excited! Thank you!

Amazon.de seems to work properly now! Thanks for fixing!

Also, huzzah!

FWIW, I added the states for the broken US sources as well (yielding a complete list of 598 sources plus a "Dundee University," which has apparently snuck across the pond to put in an appearance). For the sake of thoroughness, in response to Tim's challenge, I also took an initial stab at classying them by type. Just a rough draft, but have fun shifting and sifting, everyone!

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-pCO7CI3eqJSuC7CGDWsuWQg5RO74p5ZfaYoQFmh...

Okay so I can order the sources, but it doesn't stick to the first one on the list if I search a different source?

Example: My last book search didn't find anything until I reached my final source (amazon.com Ugh.). When I go in to search today, it's sitting on Amazon as my initial source, when I want it to be the LoC.

Firefox 40.0.3 Win 8

Sorry, can you say that a different way?

This is awesome, thank you so much!

P.S. Worked like a charm.

>84 timspalding: Okay, let me explain it this way:

Go to Add Books.
Search for anything. Make sure you search through the entire selection of preferred sources.
Leave the page. (Might even be leave the site, but that seems a bit extreme.)
Come back to add another book an hour or so later. (I had a day, but a short break shouldn't matter.)
Look at the list of sources on the lower left.

For me, My preferred start is Library of Congress. When I did the above, the return had me starting at Amazon.com, the LAST source on my list.

Make sure you search through the entire selection of preferred sources.

But wait, you went 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, right? The last was six. When you come back, it's still on 6. It remembers.

Am I describing this right? If so, that's how the feature should work. It should remember your last search source. If it always jumped back to the first, that would confuse people.

>87 timspalding:

I know that's how it has always operated, but it's not really desired behavior for many users. The one we finish on is often our source of last resort, not our preferred one. I always want to start with Overcat, even if last time the book I was searching for wasn't found there.

So, I can see it, but you'll note that, if you don't get a result, the other sources pop-up on the right. Clicking those links doesn't change what's selected.

I dunno. I'm torn.

Recently it's been using the first one all the time, which I loved.

>87 timspalding: Actually, the way it functions now is not intuitive and more confusing than it jumping back to the first search source.

That it stays on the selection you were last on is not intuitive?!

No, not when I want it to go back to my original search source. I don't see the point of being able to establish an order if it won't follow that order each and every time.

>92 timspalding: No. Just because the last book I entered wasn't on the normal sources says nothing about which source will have the next book. Why would I even remember that I had to use a weird source last time? It isn't even intuitive when I am working through a pile of books, and certainly not when I come back a few hours later with something totally different.

>92 timspalding:

Not even remotely.

Consider people's usual workflow:

"I know Overcat has good data, I'll try adding the book from there."

"Oh, it's not in Overcat, I'll try LOC."

"Oh, not there either, let's look at Cornell."

(etc.)

"All right, fine, I'll use Amazon."

Now this person comes back to add their next book, and you start them at Amazon? No. I have my preferred source, and it's the one I start with, not necessarily the one I end with.

But if you're adding a set of materials which are all likely to be found in a particular source which is not your normal source, it's handy to not have to choose it each time in a row. Can we have a gizmo that locks/unlocks the choice?

The usual work flow is to pick a source you like from the default list. Most users make no edits whatsoever to the order and add no sources whatsoever. They also don't try othe sources much if at all. That's just the simple fact of the matter.

So—I think—if they chose Amazon.co.uk, because they're British, they're going to expect that to stay. (Note: The default lists include that now, as well as the BL.)

What you're describing is "What is the work flow of the power user?"

Maybe that's what we should aim to optimize for. But, if so, we need to know that's what we're doing.

>97 timspalding:

Based on the argument in the first paragraph, what you've done to allow the ordering of multiple sources, heck for having a list of multiple sources to pick from, suggests you are already starting to optimize for the power user. How is this different?

>97 timspalding:

If they never change the sources, then "what happens when you change your source" is not relevant.

It's got to be either always first on the list or always last one you used. We're not going to have an always-the-one-I-pick-arbitrarily option.

>101 timspalding:

Oh, so you're worried about people who have a preferred source that's not in their first slot? Now that we can easily re-order sources I don't think that's much of a concern.

Yeah, first on the list seems like the best option to me.

>103 paradoxosalpha:. I could live with that.

First on the list sounds good.

>103 paradoxosalpha: Yeah, I could get behind that. My initial reaction was "no, I like it staying on the last source I used," considering I sometimes navigate away from Add Books briefly, only to return, and do want that same source. Not sure how difficult it would be to implement, but perhaps we could allow it to stay on last used source for a short amount of time? That's probably more complicated than necessary, though. I'm just thinking out loud (erm, on screen?).

Definitely have a default preference option (that's the first in the list I guess?)

First on list.

>106 lorannen: https://www.librarything.com/topic/195618#5277916

Here's a possible work-around for someone who would like to search a number of items at a site other then their default. Let's assume default is set as the 1st, i.e. @ top of the list.

Simply edit the settings by dragging the desired site to the top & save. Search. Then return the default (i.e.) preferred site to the top.

Should work right?

First on the list.

1>

Yay! Thank you!

It's much better now! A streamlined list with better quality sources.
However some sources seem to have the book text data in another character set which gives strange symbols when importing foreign language book titles (Ex. Porbase).
I'd like to have an option to import book data already present in other librarything accounts... some official sources have missing or inaccurate data that must be changed or filled in individually but all that work is inaccessible for other users to import. There was a 3rd party script for that but it no longer works...

The reason the site doesn't allow copying of other user's data is to prevent ratty data duplication. Someone who doesn't care and just grabs the first record related to their book isn't going to pay attention when say Amazon dumps crap. Then when another copies that record, and another, and another... Well you see what that would do to the quality of data here.

I'm deciding to keep it as is.

Having the source reset whenever you leave add books, long or short, is confusing. It breaks the users expectation that the screen and especially their choice not change when they're not looking. While I understand the use case for power users who know about the rule, I see lots of confusion, and feelings that LibraryThing is a lemon, for users who jump away briefly only to find it can't remember that they like searching on the British Library, or whatever. As for time-based answers, that'd be even more hidden and confusing. And a new setting for "sticking" is the sort of marginal mini-feature we need to avoid if LibraryThing is so have any spare programming power for new stuff and fixing bugs.

Ftr, I also HATE that it sticks on the last one searched, which is often NOT the one I want to use when I come back after having had to search a few places to find one with the record I want. If users like searching on a certain one, they can move that one to the top of their list now (yay for that!!), no confusion. I really strongly disagree with your view about what is confusing/expectation in this. Why would I expect my last one-off search to be the thing I come back to on another day? That is confusing unexpected behavior! It should go to the top of the list.

I would certainly not remember what I ended up using as the last source on a book entered a few days ago.

Why would I expect my last one-off search to be the thing I come back to on another day?

Well, if you have a favorite search, you might expect that favorite search to stick.

And what's the cut-off? Day, week, hour, minute. I'm not going to have it behave one way and then break. If this changes, we're going to have people:

1. Change to "British library" because they like it.
2. Search.
3. Add.
4. Edit book.
5. Save.
6. Search—and WHOOPS, it's on Amazon again.

That's a bug. And I'm not moving LibraryThing to a bug.

Do you really think it is unreasonable to expect people to move their favourite search to the top position?

>119 MarthaJeanne: NOPE! It's what I instantly did, and I know many other people commented about having rushed off to reorder as soon as it was able. I mean, that's a huge part of why we wanted this ability to begin with! Order searches by use!

I like that it stays with what your last search is. Plus it is more logical for new users who do not yet understand that they can reorder the list. Just my 2 cents.

>115 timspalding:

I think everyone thinks LT should remember that they like searching on the British Library; we disagree about whether "I have this as my first choice and always try it first, and then resorted to trying something else when it didn't work" is an expression of that or "This is the one that finally worked for me last time" is expressing that like. Personally, I think that randomly switching to Amazon because I once resorted to it and used it is not respecting my choice.

How about respecting someone's first choice if they've actively re-ordered their sources, and using wherever they landed last time if they didn't?

Do you really think it is unreasonable to expect people to move their favourite search to the top position?

Most users will not do it. New users certainly will not.

Turning this around, is it reasonable that settings will be reset to default every time I go to Add Books?

How about respecting someone's first choice if they've actively re-ordered their sources, and using wherever they landed last time if they didn't?

They are allowed to reorder sources. We respect that by not changing the order they choose. A user has no way to know that reordering sources also changes how selection work. It's a hidden functionality change.

I agree with >115 timspalding: It's too easy for the tiny minority of power users to assume that the larger base of members uses the site even remotely the same way we do. We're just vocal, so it seems like everyone thinks it's an issue, instead of the dozen or two (or less) who discuss it in talk. Tim's got a broader view, and I am willing to defer to him on this.

Turning this around, is it reasonable that settings will be reset to default every time I go to Add Books?

No. Which is why, when I have deliberately chosen the Library of Congress as my first choice for Add Books, I want you to respect that choice. I use it first. I do not want you randomly resetting my choice because last time I didn't find my book there.

>125 PhaedraB:

I'm willing to believe Tim takes a broader view. I cannot imagine anyone who would want their Source Of Last Resort to be chosen for them as their first choice for next time.

Do people not use "Try this search on:"?

Because I rarely have to move off my preferred source. If I do, it's for a reason—like I'm doing a spate of books that work better on a different source—, and I want that to stick.

>128 timspalding:

Do people not use "Try this search on:"?

Does that work now? For a long time it was converting spaces to pluses in the new search. If it's a functional option, that works for me.

is it reasonable that settings will be reset to default every time I go to Add Books?

YES! This is NORMAL functionality.

Do people not use "Try this search on:"?

If you mean when the first search fails, I do all the time. But that's where the problem comes in. If I have to go to my final choice from that list to find a book, I leave, then come back, it's still on that final choice.

>130 gilroy:

I think he meant site-default, not your-default.

If I have to go to my final choice from that list to find a book, I leave, then come back, it's still on that final choice.

No, it doesn't change the left.

>124 timspalding: It's a hidden functionality change.

Couldn't the first source be shown in a different style (bolded, highlighted or something), and followed by "(Default search)" or something simple like that?

>132 timspalding:

Actually, Tim, yes. It does.

I've done an add books search where I've gone through my whole list of sources, not from selecting the left, but from within the search box. ENDED on Amazon, cause it is my last resort source.

Gone to do something else.

Come back to the add books page, and the left selection option is on ... AMAZON. That's what I've been complaining about this entire fricking time.

Can someone duplicate this? I cannot.

I haven't added anything just recently, but it always did switch it on the left, yes. Because that's what I used all. the. time. for my searching, making it especially forgetful when I'd go to add something another day (or heck a few hours later) and not recall oh hey my last book wound up on my last choice for searching when I happen to notice after clicking search and getting something unexpected. If that's been fixed, Id be quite happy.

I do not want you randomly resetting my choice because last time I didn't find my book there

I find it odd to say that I'm "randomly resetting" something to a setting that you yourself clicked to change it to.

If this makes sense, let's always revert catalogs to Display Style A. After all, it's A. So what if you set it to B. Then we could reset your collections each time. Just because you clicked to add something to collections X, Y and Z doesn't mean you want it that way. You can reorder collections. What else could the first position mean than that you want it to be the default every time?

>137 .Monkey.:

I believe it's changed for good now, and works the way you want it to.

I suppose I'll settle for that, then. Not ideal, but better than it was.

But I will say, I don't agree that the display styles is a fitting example of the same behavior we're asking for.

>138 timspalding:

I clicked to change it temporarily as a last resort . Not forever and ever, amen.

Don't you have a preferred anything, anywhere? Say you have a preferred grocery store where you always go, and one day they're out of something you need, so you go to a more distant or less convenient or more expensive store for that item. Should I then assume that you will start going to that other store all the time from now on?


What else could the first position mean than that you want it to be the default every time?

I don't know, you tell me, you're the one arguing that a user's expressed preference is overridden by a single act of desperation.

I gave up. Ammar is going to provide a checkbox within the pop-up, allowing you to force the first one every time.

Couldn't there be some visual indicator for this like in >133 paradoxosalpha: that would make it less confusing what is happening when the checkbox has been set or not?

This seems like such a storm in a teacup to me. I check which source the option is set on every time; if it isn't where I want to try first, I click that one. What is so hard about that?

Yes, I've added lots of books that way. No, I never did feel put upon. Perhaps it is because I have no programming knowledge and therefore do not have the mania for less clicks?

>143 MrsLee: yes, to me it looks like a debate on whether to leave the toilet seat always up or always down or just left as you used it last. People never agree :-)

Why would I feel the need to check it every time, when 9 times of 10 I can find what I need in overcat, or at least one of my first couple preferred sources?? It makes no sense to bother trying to figure out which source down the list I used last time, and it's a huge annoyance when it winds up doing a search for a least-preferred source instead of most-preferred.

Sigh. Due to your crying/whining, I had to be bothered to add a checkbox to choose your preference.
Now, thanks to you guys, our UI is bloated that much more.

(just kidding, I actually agree with the 'It should be the first source always' camp but don't tell Tim) :-)

Ok, so now if you open the lightbox, you will see a checkbox at the bottom of the 'Your sources' tab.



Let me know if it acts up.

Thanks. I didn't care enough to kerfluff about it, but I do prefer it that way, and have ticked my box.

Thanks, Ammar! And thanks, Tim.

Wonderful.

>146 LT_Ammar: I am now firmly in your fan club, and your secret is safe with me. Thank you very much!

*Kermit Cheer!*