Checkmarks - separate Read from My Library

I love the idea of checkmarks to quickly see the status of a book - especially when I am looking at a series that I am reading or other lists. However, I wish there was a way to separate books that I have read from books that I own. I may own all the books of a series, but I have not necessarily read all of them. Instead of being able to quickly see which ones I have read, I have to click and look at each book separately. (I don't think there is a different, quick way to do this.)

It would be really great if there would be a different color for My Library/Read books which would appear in order between Read But Unowned and My Library.

This would be nice

It would be nice if the iconography could pull double-duty: maybe have the color of the checkmark indicate read status, something like:

>1 rretzler:, >3 saltmanz:

I would like that too.

But how do you propose for LT to recognize a book as Read? There is no standard Read collection.

There's really only two collections that say anything about Read: To Be Read and Read but Unowned.

None of the others are set to recognize Read status. You'd either need to create a Read checkbox on the book edit page or create a standing Read collection. You can't rely on the Read date because not everyone uses said date. You can't rely on reviews, because people put all sorts of stuff in reviews. (Adding code to weed out reviews flagged as Not a Review wouldn't work either, because there are valid reviews flagged because someone didn't like what the review said. And it takes time to hunt all those down.)

Since Your Library is a catch all, it can't qualify as the Read collection, necessarily either.

So... um ... How do you want them to do this? There's more to think through than just the check marks.

>6 gilroy: "You can't rely on the Read date because not everyone uses said date"

That's an incentive for people to use it. If it's used, then your checkmarks gain extra depth. No date = not read. I think it's not LTs job to be a mindreader.

>7 reading_fox:

Having to make up reading dates for all books I've read in the past and don't recall just when I read them just to use the feature doesn't sound like an incentive to use reading dates to me. If anything, it sounds like an incentive to continue not using them so as to keep the checkmarks consistent.

The easiest way to implement it would probably be to make another standard collection Read, just like there are currently collections Read But Unowned and To-Read. The system already recognizes Read But Unowned for the purpose of checkmarks, so Read could be recognized in the same way if you assign them to the collection. It would also be a quicker way to mark the books read than going through 'edit books'

>9 SandraArdnas: I think that's the best solution, too.

reading_fox (#7):

That's an incentive for people to use it. If it's used, then your checkmarks gain extra depth. No date = not read. I think it's not LTs job to be a mindreader.

Really? I'm supposed to remember when I read something that I read fifteen or more years ago, just so that I can distinguish between "Books I've read" and "Books I haven't read"? How is creating a checkbox, or another standard collection, requiring LT to be a mind-reader?

I'll add my voice to those expressing distaste for the idea that this mark would hinge on reading dates. LT is primarily for cataloging, not for tracking reading. If I add reading dates to a catalog entry, that's all fine. But their absence doesn't mean the book hasn't been read, it means that the reading dates are not recorded/known. Just like an empty number-of-pages field doesn't mean the book has no pages.

>7 reading_fox: As others have said, no, it's more an incentive to avoid them. I'd erase what dates I have used to correct my checks to not throw me off.

I agree that the easiest way to do this would be to have a standard Read collection. One of the first things I did when I joined LT was to create a Read collection. I don't know about everyone else, but I have so many books that I own and have not read yet, so to just have a My Library collection and not a Read collection was not very helpful to me.

I don't use the Read date often because I most of the time I don't remember - it is not as quick and easy to get to the Read date as it is to just be able to change the status of my collection from To Read to Read. I use My Library when I purchase a book. Perhaps My Library was meant to be the Read, but for me it has the connotation of books I own versus books I have read.

It doesn't make sense to have LT try to convert someone's input into a checkmark, obviously, the checkmark should come from user's Read collection. I'm not sure about having the double-duty - I think I would probably forget which meant read and which did not. For my purposes, there are 4 main distinctions I want from a collection or a checkmark - Read/Owned, TBR/Owned, Read/Unowned, Wishlist.

Priority-wise, I would think the Read would come before My Library.

I hope y'all have considered that the word "read" can be read as either "to read" or "read already." English is not very helpful in this regard. The existence of a "To Read" collection doesn't really clarify enough for someone who hasn't read one of these threads.

Yeah, without a standard "Read" collection (which I forgot doesn't exist, for the reason given in #15, as I recall) this doesn't really work. I did have to laugh at the expected "I would alter my catalog data just to spite this feature that I would otherwise ignore" comments, though.

>14 rretzler: I don't know about everyone else, but I have so many books that I own and have not read yet
I would *never* own hundreds of books I have not read yet, how dare you insinuate that I have a problem.

;-)

Owning hundreds of unread books isn't a problem, it's a library.

So maybe it would be preferrable to mark the books that are To Read. We already have a standard collection. It is clear what it is for.

BTW, it may sound weird, but I always have several books that are in both the Read but Unowned and the To Read collections. These are the recently borrowed library books that I haven't gotten to yet.

It's not necessary to have a "standard" Read collection. Anyone can, at will, make their own Read collection within their own catalogue.

>19 MarthaJeanne: Yeah I also use "read but unowned" to indicate books that I do not own, whether I have read them or not.

>20 Crypto-Willobie: Right, but in order to implement the suggestion in >1 rretzler: it would have to be a standard collection.

The issue is NOT with having a standard Read collection - hence, the title of this post. The only way to get around the issue of having a checkmark for a book that has been finished is to have a standard collection, otherwise, it would be difficult for LT to make work.

Let me try to explain my issue with an example from my own LT library. I am reading the Mrs. Bradley series by Gladys Mitchell. There are approximately 67 books in the series, so it is going to take me some time. These are books that I want to own, and the prices on Amazon are reasonable, so I am buying them a little at a time. I probably own 30 or so books right now but have only read 10-ish. I'm reading them at a rate of just a few a year, so I don't recall overtime which was the last one I read. I would like to be able to see at a glance in LT (without having to use a different site) which books I have read and which I have not. Currently, when I look at the series page, this is what I see:



Lots of green checkmarks, with no way to know which books I have read, just which books I own. In order to figure where I am in the series on LT, I have to click on several books to go to the individual book's page to see whether or not I have read it already (this can take a bit of time.) OR I can go to a different website, where I am keeping track of series read (which also takes a little bit of time to open up and search.) I would prefer not to have to go to a different website to keep track - it would be nice to have it all in one place.

It would be so much easier for me to be able to look at this series page and see which book I need to read in the series. All I see now is which books I own. For purposes of figuring out what I need to PURCHASE next this is great - for purposes of figuring out what I need to READ next - NOT so great.

I would think this would be understandable to most - after all, I think most of us probably use LT to keep track of not only what we own but what we've read. As I posted earlier, I figured out early on that the easiest way for me to keep track was to make a Read collection. Since I have a To Be Read collection, it is easy enough for me to figure out that the Read collection means books that I have already finished and To Be Read means those that I want to pick up and enjoy. Perhaps the Read collection could be called Finished, and the To Read collection could be To Be Read - that might alleviate confusion.

So how would this be done? Since the other checkmarks are based on collections, it seems only logical that the Read (or Finished) checkmark be based on a collection as well. It seems that it would be easy enough to have LT add a collection that would be Finished (to alleviate possible confusion)- and then to have a different colored checkmark for that collection.

Yes, I suppose another way to think of this would be to use To Read (which I also do) and then have a different colored checkmark for it. There should just be a way to quickly see via checkmark for books that are owned to see whether or not they have been read/finished.

I don't think it is something that needs to be that difficult. I also don't think it should be controversial, and I think it would be of benefit to many members. If members don't want to use that collection, then they don't have to. They would not be forced to use it, they would not have to add dates, and it should in no way affect anyone that doesn't want to change the way they have already been doing things. I also think that this enhances LT's utility as a book site. I know that there are a lot of people who keep track of series reading on FictFact (and it can now be done on Fantastic Fiction). FictFact doesn't have all the books, and I would much rather use LT for this purpose anyway.

The only issue that I might foresee being a problem would be if someone already has a Finished collection. But I'm sure that the LT staff is smart enough to write code that could go through and look at existing collections and convert anything that is already in a collection with that name, or change the name slightly, if need be. Then it would be up to each member to decide if they wanted to use the new Finished collection and how they want to go about getting their books into that collection (for me, it would be easy - I would just bulk edit my books in the Read collection to move them to the Finished collection.)

>17 norabelle414: >18 paradoxosalpha: Problem? Certainly not! Library? Yes, but I have discovered over the years that I would rather be a non-lending library (unless I don't like the book.) 😜 Mine tend not to come back to me, sadly.

>19 MarthaJeanne: Not weird. I created a collection called Borrowed - that way I can quickly tell whether I own it or not. The Read, But Unowned is kind of a catch-all for me for books that I borrowed from the library plus books that I used to own but no longer do (given away, loaned to someone and not gotten them back, etc.)

I once lent a copy of my favorite book to someone, and I had to marry him to get it back! 😜

The problem is that the green "Your Library" checkmark takes precedence over the grey "Other" checkmark. Without a standard collection we'd need a way to assign our own colors to checkmarks and probably their precedence as well, but I don't see Tim doing that. It would be neat though.

>23 rretzler: . . . and I had to marry him to get it back!
So, his plan worked?

>22 rretzler: But I'm sure that the LT staff is smart enough to write code that could go through and look at existing collections and convert anything that is already in a collection with that name, or change the name slightly, if need be. Then it would be up to each member to decide if they wanted to use the new Finished collection and how they want to go about getting their books into that collection>

Oh, I can't wait to see the comment thread on that announcement. Where's the popcorn?

>22 rretzler: I like your suggestion of calling the collection "finished", since the "red vs. reed" issue seems to come up any time someone mentions a standard Read collection.

>22 rretzler: http://www.librarything.com/catalog/rretzler&collection=-1&deepsearch=gl...

You can easily see here which books of hers that you own you have read. If you had added reading dates it would be possible to see the order you had read them in.

Hi >28 MarthaJeanne: What did you do to get that? And how does it work? I guess I don’t understand. Is it only because they have stars that you know which ones are read? I have an “owned but unread collection”. I suppose that would not work very well if there were several series in there.

>29 krazy4katz: I just searched the catalogue for Gladys. It came up with one extra book, which I ignored. There are both Read and To Read collections which are easy to see. I very often search for an author to see which books I haven't read for a while. If you have several series by the same author that you want to be able to search for seperately your best choice is probably to use tags.

Thank you!

I am an LT menber for years.

But it is borring and anoying.
And maybee this should be discussed in an other thread.

As soon as somebody is making a recommendation to improve the site some persons are against it!

That's ok, if they say their opinion or they put the finger of any unclear or (in their opinion) wrong points.
But often those persons know just one answer: theirs.

I for example, I am a reader and not a collector.
In post >12 paradoxosalpha: said LT is for collectors and not for readers. What does that mean for me? Should I leave LT and go to an other site? A site only for bookreaders?
I do not know one. (Any suggestions are welcome.)

I do not use all the "Social Stuff" like Facebook and so on. If anybody else does, thats ok for me. They are ok.
But I think, as a reader, who likes stories and found information in books are ok too.

Please excuse if I am rude in my expression. I am stressed for years about that behavior.
So please, if you don't need a recommendation, let the people discuss it, they would like or need it.
As an old person, from an old democracy, from the old world, I am used to accept other peoples expressions/attitudes .

>32 birder4106: I think you misread >12 paradoxosalpha:. The opposition there is not to the basic idea, but in basing it on reading dates. There is also a big difference between saying 'LT is primarily for cataloging and not for tracking reading.' and saying 'LT is for collectors and not for readers.'

Read it again in the context (that it was written in) of discussing how the proposal could best be implemented. The point is not objecting to differentiating between books read and not read, but in basing that on a feature that only some people use, and that even those who use it going on won't have data for on books that they read many years ago. If you check that library you will quickly see that finishing dates are not being used, but other features show that the member does read, and keeps track of what has been read, just not when.

I think this was meant not to object to the OP's suggestion, but to make sure that if it comes that it is useful to as many people as possible.

>33 MarthaJeanne:

Thanks, MarthaJeanne. You read me correctly.

As a reader, I value LT's ability to manage catalogs. I catalog books I do not own, so that I can track my reading and post reviews. I don't assume that cataloging = collecting, and I didn't mean to imply any such thing.

>28 MarthaJeanne: Good idea, unfortunately not quite as easily as one might think - since the books are not in numerical/series order (and call me crazy, but I like to try to read in series order if I can), it takes a little more work than if I could just see the list on the series page and quickly know which was the next book in the series by a different colored checkmark. Yes, on your link it is somewhat better than what I would be doing now if I actually used LT to keep track of my series in order, but is still a little bit of work to see which I need to read next. If I go to FictFact, it is quick and easy for me to see the next book, as it would be on LT if there was a checkmark separation between books read and those to be read.

Having read dates wouldn't really tell me which book was next, which is what I am looking for. It would only tell me the order I had already read them in, which isn't as important to me.

As a matter of fact, when I looked at this link to try to see which book was next, I pretty quickly settled on book 13, completely missing the fact that I still had not read book 8 (because it is not a Kindle book and I purchased it used much later.) Even narrowing this down to my To Read collection (https://www.librarything.com/catalog/rretzler&collection=-1&deepsearch=gladys) it still takes a little time to see which book is next - which will be more difficult as I purchase more and more of the series. Unfortunately, it is still NOT quick and easy and the larger the series, the more difficult it will be to search for the next book in the series since it cannot be sorted by the CK for series order.

>24 jjwilson61: Which is why I'm suggesting (see >14 rretzler:) that in order of priority the Read would come before the My Library. And yes, the Read, or Finished, or whatever it would be called would have to be a standard collection to have a colored checkmark.

This is what I'm looking for - something quick and easy - something I don't need to think about or search for:



OR

When you put a book in your Not Read Yet collection take it OUT of Your Library. It will then still show in your All Collections but also will show a non-green checkmark on the series page. (Or if you don't even have or list a copy then no checkmark at all.)

The way I track the books I own is by using My Library, so I'm not sure that method would work well for me.

... just a possible work-around...

I appreciate the suggestion!