This topic is currently marked as "dormant"—the last message is more than 90 days old. You can revive it by posting a reply.
1jseger9000
I know it's been brought up in other threads, but figured it deserved one of its' own.
It would be nice to have a field for table of contents for anthologies. I decide to pick up an anthology based on the contents. I'm sure most (all) do. I'd love to have a section on the works page for contents.
I know there's user description, but I just tried adding the contents for 100 Hair-Raising Little Horror Stories and it looked awful.
It would be nice to have a field for table of contents for anthologies. I decide to pick up an anthology based on the contents. I'm sure most (all) do. I'd love to have a section on the works page for contents.
I know there's user description, but I just tried adding the contents for 100 Hair-Raising Little Horror Stories and it looked awful.
2ATimson
Is it an anthology by one author or multiple? If it's multiple, you could try entering the stories as the roles for the various authors.
3nperrin
Nothing special to contribute except that I really, really want this.
I've been thinking about it a bit since I put it on my list of ten things, and I don't think I would be really satisfied by just a set of fields for the contents, as nice as that would be. I really want a way to treat individual stories (or whatever) as works. I keep a spreadsheet entirely separate from LT just to record this kind of information--title, author, where I read it (anthology, magazine, etc), date, and summary. It doesn't make much sense for me to use tags in my own home-cooked spreadsheet (though now I think of it, maybe I should), but if we could have this on LT I would definitely, definitely tag. And of course it would be good if they had their own CK....
I've been thinking about it a bit since I put it on my list of ten things, and I don't think I would be really satisfied by just a set of fields for the contents, as nice as that would be. I really want a way to treat individual stories (or whatever) as works. I keep a spreadsheet entirely separate from LT just to record this kind of information--title, author, where I read it (anthology, magazine, etc), date, and summary. It doesn't make much sense for me to use tags in my own home-cooked spreadsheet (though now I think of it, maybe I should), but if we could have this on LT I would definitely, definitely tag. And of course it would be good if they had their own CK....
4jseger9000
ATimson,
That's a good suggestion for a lot of anthologies (maybe one I should look into), but have you ever seen those Barnes and Noble '100... Little...' anthologies? There's 80 to 100 authors per book and the series has 16 books. That could be an enormous task. Also, even if you add all the authors (or all the stories), what about linking them to their stories (or authors) in the book?
I think a free text field similar to description would be an okay start. (You can't use the description field because if you format a neat column of stories and authors, when you save it will smoosh it together as if it were a paragraph.)
I know once I post this people will start with the "I'd like it to be searchable", "I'd like the anthology to show up on the author's page if s/he has a story in it", etc. Those are all great, but I was just trying to propose a simple starter place that wouldn't require tons of code from the LT crew.
That's a good suggestion for a lot of anthologies (maybe one I should look into), but have you ever seen those Barnes and Noble '100... Little...' anthologies? There's 80 to 100 authors per book and the series has 16 books. That could be an enormous task. Also, even if you add all the authors (or all the stories), what about linking them to their stories (or authors) in the book?
I think a free text field similar to description would be an okay start. (You can't use the description field because if you format a neat column of stories and authors, when you save it will smoosh it together as if it were a paragraph.)
I know once I post this people will start with the "I'd like it to be searchable", "I'd like the anthology to show up on the author's page if s/he has a story in it", etc. Those are all great, but I was just trying to propose a simple starter place that wouldn't require tons of code from the LT crew.
5jseger9000
And yeah, once that were started and all the other mega-tasks were accomplished, nperrin's idea would be so cool!
6andyl
#2
Collaborations make that difficult to tie down which authors wrote which stories. You may have 100 stories but 110 authors (well I have a few anthologies that have 2 or 3 collaborations and I have collections where it is one author in collaboration with a variety of other authors and sometimes a collaboration of more than 2). At the moment the only way to do it reliably is in comments.
Collaborations make that difficult to tie down which authors wrote which stories. You may have 100 stories but 110 authors (well I have a few anthologies that have 2 or 3 collaborations and I have collections where it is one author in collaboration with a variety of other authors and sometimes a collaboration of more than 2). At the moment the only way to do it reliably is in comments.
7bluesalamanders
4 jseger
From the way I've seen people talking about this, I think the idea is more like the short story shows up on the author's page, and has its own work page, so on that page would be a list of all the anthologies or collections or whatever it's in...
...how cool would that be? I would love that. They'd have to be separate from works, a separate list, a different kind of page.
From the way I've seen people talking about this, I think the idea is more like the short story shows up on the author's page, and has its own work page, so on that page would be a list of all the anthologies or collections or whatever it's in...
...how cool would that be? I would love that. They'd have to be separate from works, a separate list, a different kind of page.
9stephmo
I'd love, love, love to have a good way to enter anthologies. In the 10 ways to improve LT thread, this is what I was getting at with my "Different Common Knowledge Forms."
In my mind, you'd attatch the anthology form to a book and it would be something like this:
Title (short story, poem, novella)
Author (lookup enabled so as to not confuse)
Original Pub Date (yes!)
Then it would tab in and you'd get the regular characer and important places stuffs.
And it would go on and on until you had the items all entered.
At this point, I'd envision another break on an author page where it said something to the effect of "Author has Contributed to the Following:" and then it would list the Anthology Title and the Title of the story/poem/novella.
ETA - I just haven't figured out how to differentiate between single-author short story collections and multiple author collections. It would seem silly to have Me Talk Pretty One Day show up as all of the short stories under the "Contributed" section for David Sedaris.
In my mind, you'd attatch the anthology form to a book and it would be something like this:
Title (short story, poem, novella)
Author (lookup enabled so as to not confuse)
Original Pub Date (yes!)
Then it would tab in and you'd get the regular characer and important places stuffs.
And it would go on and on until you had the items all entered.
At this point, I'd envision another break on an author page where it said something to the effect of "Author has Contributed to the Following:" and then it would list the Anthology Title and the Title of the story/poem/novella.
ETA - I just haven't figured out how to differentiate between single-author short story collections and multiple author collections. It would seem silly to have Me Talk Pretty One Day show up as all of the short stories under the "Contributed" section for David Sedaris.
10jseger9000
For the most part a single author collection like Me Talk Pretty One Day could just have the stories entered in the description field. It would be nice if the description field didn't auto-format everything as a paragraph.
11stephmo
Me Talk Pretty One Day is probably a bad example. I'm thinking more along the lines of Consider the Lobster or even Everything's Eventual where these essays and stories were previously published elsewhere.
That's information I'd like to capture along with the more-obvious multi-author anthology, like Transgressions.
That's information I'd like to capture along with the more-obvious multi-author anthology, like Transgressions.
13jseger9000
You can use the HTML tag to force a paragraph break.
Cool. I'll have to try that!
Cool. I'll have to try that!
14vpfluke
I want to second the request for a Table of Contents, which could go perhaps into Common Knowledge. This would be good, not only for anthologies, but would be good for books of essays (same auhtor or two authors) and non-fiction books which cover a lot of territory.
My local public library now has Table of Contents listings for many newer books.
My local public library now has Table of Contents listings for many newer books.
15nsblumenfeld
This feature is something I also would really like to see. One thing that actually drives me a little crazy when combining is when an authors works page is cluttered with individual stories.
My idea was actually a secondary database of short stories, essays, individual poems -- pieces written by authors, but that don't exist as their own work, but only contained in collections, anthologies, etc. This way, an authors main combined works page wouldn't be cluttered with these things, but you'd be able to add them as contents of works.
This would also be good because it would allow you to see, for instance, which stories have been published in multiple anthologies (or reprinted in a collection), and would be helpful in finding stories by authors you like in anthologies you might not normally check out.
It would also be helpful as a bibliographic tool, if original publication dates of stories, essays, poems could be filled in, instead of just having them share a publication date with whatever works they're contained in.
My idea was actually a secondary database of short stories, essays, individual poems -- pieces written by authors, but that don't exist as their own work, but only contained in collections, anthologies, etc. This way, an authors main combined works page wouldn't be cluttered with these things, but you'd be able to add them as contents of works.
This would also be good because it would allow you to see, for instance, which stories have been published in multiple anthologies (or reprinted in a collection), and would be helpful in finding stories by authors you like in anthologies you might not normally check out.
It would also be helpful as a bibliographic tool, if original publication dates of stories, essays, poems could be filled in, instead of just having them share a publication date with whatever works they're contained in.
16andyl
#14
Table of contents cannot go in CK at the moment. CK is at work level; contents sometimes differ between editions (the UK editor putting stories in a different order to the US editor).
#15
This idea has been discussed plenty of times before.
For example I would like most of the same features for short stories as normal works - reviews, comments, tags, CK, the facility to combine short stories (for those that change name between publications). Individual short stories should be able to collaborate with novels in forming series. *
The issue is that it is a lot of work. Not just that but it will require quite a few database changes (with all the issues that brings) as well as some serious thinking on how the user-interface should work (quite a few people are resistant to change on the UI front).
* For example I have a copy of The mammoth book of historical whodunnits which at the moment is part of the Brother Cadfael, Sister Frevisse and Judge Dee series. It used to be part of the Sister Fidelma and Sherlock Holmes series as well. To my mind this is wrong - an individual short story in the book may well be part of the series but the work as a whole isn't.
Judge Dee (short stories)
Table of contents cannot go in CK at the moment. CK is at work level; contents sometimes differ between editions (the UK editor putting stories in a different order to the US editor).
#15
This idea has been discussed plenty of times before.
For example I would like most of the same features for short stories as normal works - reviews, comments, tags, CK, the facility to combine short stories (for those that change name between publications). Individual short stories should be able to collaborate with novels in forming series. *
The issue is that it is a lot of work. Not just that but it will require quite a few database changes (with all the issues that brings) as well as some serious thinking on how the user-interface should work (quite a few people are resistant to change on the UI front).
* For example I have a copy of The mammoth book of historical whodunnits which at the moment is part of the Brother Cadfael, Sister Frevisse and Judge Dee series. It used to be part of the Sister Fidelma and Sherlock Holmes series as well. To my mind this is wrong - an individual short story in the book may well be part of the series but the work as a whole isn't.
Judge Dee (short stories)
17lorax
#16
contents sometimes differ between editions
They shouldn't differ substantially -- if they do, they aren't the same work. The specific case you cite (US/UK editions having exactly the same stories but in a different order) would be about the only exception I can think of -- if there are actually different stories, in my admittedly minority opinion they wouldn't be the same work.
contents sometimes differ between editions
They shouldn't differ substantially -- if they do, they aren't the same work. The specific case you cite (US/UK editions having exactly the same stories but in a different order) would be about the only exception I can think of -- if there are actually different stories, in my admittedly minority opinion they wouldn't be the same work.
18infiniteletters
If contents differ for anthologies, they're not the same work. Similar, yes, but not the same.
19andyl
#17
Oh I would agree if an anthology/short story collection had different stories between editions it is a separate work. Different order of stories (and differing introductions - which for me isn't enough to trigger separation but some might want to list) was at one time more prevalent than today.
Oh I would agree if an anthology/short story collection had different stories between editions it is a separate work. Different order of stories (and differing introductions - which for me isn't enough to trigger separation but some might want to list) was at one time more prevalent than today.
20ATimson
#15: My idea was actually a secondary database of short stories, essays, individual poems -- pieces written by authors, but that don't exist as their own work, but only contained in collections, anthologies, etc.
It couldn't exist entirely separately, though; it's not uncommon to see novellas once published in their own volumes reprinted in an anthology with the author's short stories, for example. Or nowadays, you even see an author's shorts published as their own work, but only electronically.
It couldn't exist entirely separately, though; it's not uncommon to see novellas once published in their own volumes reprinted in an anthology with the author's short stories, for example. Or nowadays, you even see an author's shorts published as their own work, but only electronically.
21Musereader
There are the ace doubles as well, two novels in one book, many of the novels got independantly published later.
22Musereader
There are the ace doubles as well, two novels in one book, many of the novels got independantly published later.
23nsblumenfeld
Speaking as a guy who knows virtually nothing about programming or how the LT databases work or anything like that, I see this as two different things.
For two-in-ones, omnibus editions of multiple novels, things like that, I'd like a "Contained In" option or something like that that wouldn't necessitate any new dbing.
For stories, essays, poems, I'd have them in a different database. In cases where individual stories or novellas or whatever are published standalone online, or in chapbook editions, I'd have those editions in the main Works database and then put the story from the Story database as their sole content, or something like that, because Combined Works pages will be TERRIBLE if every individual story is mixed in with all the other works.
For two-in-ones, omnibus editions of multiple novels, things like that, I'd like a "Contained In" option or something like that that wouldn't necessitate any new dbing.
For stories, essays, poems, I'd have them in a different database. In cases where individual stories or novellas or whatever are published standalone online, or in chapbook editions, I'd have those editions in the main Works database and then put the story from the Story database as their sole content, or something like that, because Combined Works pages will be TERRIBLE if every individual story is mixed in with all the other works.
24andyl
#23
People have already entered short stories as works. Some author pages already have hundreds of short stories listed in the books.
However having a clean and unambiguous user interface is key. For example you could have a "Books by ..." section that showed the top 15 books (as at present) and a "Short Work by ..." section that showed the top 10 short works. Each section would have a "see all" link and a "combine/separate" link. A book might also have an expand/collapse toggle such that it could show its contents as well.
People have already entered short stories as works. Some author pages already have hundreds of short stories listed in the books.
However having a clean and unambiguous user interface is key. For example you could have a "Books by ..." section that showed the top 15 books (as at present) and a "Short Work by ..." section that showed the top 10 short works. Each section would have a "see all" link and a "combine/separate" link. A book might also have an expand/collapse toggle such that it could show its contents as well.
25jjwilson61
There's no reason that you couldn't add the short stories to the books database since many of the fields will be the same and just mark them as short stories. Then you'd have to go to the author page and put the books and short stories in different sections as suggested by andyl.
26monarchi
>23 nsblumenfeld: For two-in-ones, omnibus editions of multiple novels, things like that, I'd like a "Contained In" option or something like that that wouldn't necessitate any new dbing.
Yes! This would be a great feature, and would hopefully cut down on some of the mistaken combining that goes on.
I'm a bit wary of including short works as independent entities, though (except in the cases where they are available individually for whatever reason.) It brings up a whole host of questions as far as recommendations and/or combining. Since LT is primarily a resource for cataloging books, the inclusion of short works seems like it would take some serious adjustments to the infrastructure. (which would be nice, but not high on my list of priorities.)
I'd be happy with a (searchable) field for Contents* on a works page – or better yet, multiple fields, one for each short work. Without creating works pages and complete CK datasets for each short work, it would be nice to have each short work referenced somehow on the Author page, along with the work(s) that it appears in. Anthologies that include excerpts from longer, book-length works might be another hassle altogether.
Just my 2¢.
*I hesitate to use "ToC" because that implies listing the order – and I think the value of the field might be better expressed in alpha-author or alpha-title sorting, which emphasizes content, than in issues like the US/UK ordering brought up above.
Yes! This would be a great feature, and would hopefully cut down on some of the mistaken combining that goes on.
I'm a bit wary of including short works as independent entities, though (except in the cases where they are available individually for whatever reason.) It brings up a whole host of questions as far as recommendations and/or combining. Since LT is primarily a resource for cataloging books, the inclusion of short works seems like it would take some serious adjustments to the infrastructure. (which would be nice, but not high on my list of priorities.)
I'd be happy with a (searchable) field for Contents* on a works page – or better yet, multiple fields, one for each short work. Without creating works pages and complete CK datasets for each short work, it would be nice to have each short work referenced somehow on the Author page, along with the work(s) that it appears in. Anthologies that include excerpts from longer, book-length works might be another hassle altogether.
Just my 2¢.
*I hesitate to use "ToC" because that implies listing the order – and I think the value of the field might be better expressed in alpha-author or alpha-title sorting, which emphasizes content, than in issues like the US/UK ordering brought up above.
27nsblumenfeld
>26 monarchi:
I like the way you think. Agree with just about everything you said.
As far as excerpts, I don't think it would be a problem. Most are arranged to read on their own, so just give it whatever title it's given in the anthology, even if that's "Extract from Forthcoming Novel".
But Contained In is a thing I'd love. It always looks so awkward to list titles from an omnibus in parentheses or separated by commas in the title field.
I like the way you think. Agree with just about everything you said.
As far as excerpts, I don't think it would be a problem. Most are arranged to read on their own, so just give it whatever title it's given in the anthology, even if that's "Extract from Forthcoming Novel".
But Contained In is a thing I'd love. It always looks so awkward to list titles from an omnibus in parentheses or separated by commas in the title field.
28muzzie
I can see this for short stories, especially if it's searchable. Also would help one when purchasing books with duplicate (already owned) short stories. Like buying mutual funds containing the same investment entities.
I have reservations concerning books and novellas also published separately. Presently, I list them as a work without an ISBN and use a tag back to the listing. There are also instances where a work is published in serial form (The Green Mile) and then sold as a book. LT has been able to handle that one since each book was issued with its own ISBN, which is not the case with many older works.
I believe that all books and novellas should be catalogued in a way that allows them to be searched, reviewed, and combined.
I don't catalogue short stories separately but I do short works that are published separately, such as pamphlets. I am not alone, since upon entering I am often surprised at the number sharing frequently obscure works.
I have reservations concerning books and novellas also published separately. Presently, I list them as a work without an ISBN and use a tag back to the listing. There are also instances where a work is published in serial form (The Green Mile) and then sold as a book. LT has been able to handle that one since each book was issued with its own ISBN, which is not the case with many older works.
I believe that all books and novellas should be catalogued in a way that allows them to be searched, reviewed, and combined.
I don't catalogue short stories separately but I do short works that are published separately, such as pamphlets. I am not alone, since upon entering I am often surprised at the number sharing frequently obscure works.
29monarchi
>28 muzzie: I don't catalogue short stories separately but I do short works that are published separately, such as pamphlets. I am not alone, since upon entering I am often surprised at the number sharing frequently obscure works.
I think that makes perfect sense. I was (erroneously) using the term "short works" to refer to the fact of being contained within an anthology, not the actual length of the work. It's an important distinction. Thanks.
I think that makes perfect sense. I was (erroneously) using the term "short works" to refer to the fact of being contained within an anthology, not the actual length of the work. It's an important distinction. Thanks.
30trollsdotter
It's too bad that a CK field like the Series (or Awards, etc.) wouldn't work. We could assign shorter stories (or books for omnibuses) to each book (Title / Author) and LT could do massive computing in the background to take us to a work page if it already exists as an independent entity. This idea still doesn't allow us to individually rate, tag or review the stories for ourselves, though.
31PortiaLong
I want this feature SOOO badly (so badly in fact that I would be willing to pay extra to have it - like, at least another $25). This is the kind of thing that LT could conceivably do that a paper card catalogue could never accomplish - a whole nother level of meta-information.
I currently keep a paper printout of my favorite authors short story biblios and highlight the ones I have in various anthologies and note which ones they are in. I have considered using tags to indicate the authors (not all - just my favorites) that contributed to an anthology and experimented with listing contents in "comments." I have noticed that some LTers have started to list short stories as works with "short story" bracketed in the title (bluetyson will sometimes do this). I have shied away from doing this as it clutters up the main works page. I am experimenting with adding the authors of short stories in an anthology as "contributors" under the "multiple author" field but since this doesn't (as yet) link up with their own author pages it seems a little premature.
Ultimately (if I were Queen of LT) I would like to see a separate page for "non-works works" or maybe "Other materials" - anthologies associated with the editor (either on the main works page or on this new page) and short stories/articles/poems associated with author with a link back to the anthology/collection you entered it from (see my profile for my distiction between anthology/collection and omnibus)
From #24: "However having a clean and unambiguous user interface is key. For example you could have a "Books by ..." section that showed the top 15 books (as at present) and a "Short Work by ..." section that showed the top 10 short works. Each section would have a "see all" link and a "combine/separate" link. A book might also have an expand/collapse toggle such that it could show its contents as well."
You could also then be a little stricter about what was listed as a "Work" (something published between two covers that, if it were published today, would be assigned an ISBN number). I would like to see Boxed Sets moved to this "Other" page (i.e. Each of the books in The Lord of the Rings is a "Work" while the boxed set is an "Other" or is relegated to "Series").
This could also help with works pages getting cluttered up by periodicals edited by the author (I am thinking old Sci-Fi mags here (Analog or Amazing Science Fiction) - the periodical would show up on the "Other Materials" page of the editor and the short stories included would show up on the "Other Materials" page of the author (with a link back to the periodical in the "Included In" field). While our busy Thingamabrarians are busy combining/separating "Works" they could also have a "This is not a Work" button that would relegate it to the "Other Materials" page (unless someone could come along and show that they DID in fact have a copy of Screwtop short story that was published ALL BY ITSELF (and not as part of the Tor Double Screwtop/The Girl Who Was Plugged In).
When you entered a new item the default could be the formatting for a "Work" but you could have a checkbox (like the "currently reading" / "to read" boxes) that - if selected - would change the fields to those appropriate for the type of item being entered. So for "short story" you would get a field for "title", "author", and "included in" - for the last you could choose from anthologies you had entered or perhaps even (remember I am playing Queen of LT here) anthologies/periodicals that other LTers had entered as containing that story.
You could keep the tagging/reviewing/etc. that you have for the works so you can tag/review/etc. each short story or the anthology as a whole.
I currently keep a paper printout of my favorite authors short story biblios and highlight the ones I have in various anthologies and note which ones they are in. I have considered using tags to indicate the authors (not all - just my favorites) that contributed to an anthology and experimented with listing contents in "comments." I have noticed that some LTers have started to list short stories as works with "short story" bracketed in the title (bluetyson will sometimes do this). I have shied away from doing this as it clutters up the main works page. I am experimenting with adding the authors of short stories in an anthology as "contributors" under the "multiple author" field but since this doesn't (as yet) link up with their own author pages it seems a little premature.
Ultimately (if I were Queen of LT) I would like to see a separate page for "non-works works" or maybe "Other materials" - anthologies associated with the editor (either on the main works page or on this new page) and short stories/articles/poems associated with author with a link back to the anthology/collection you entered it from (see my profile for my distiction between anthology/collection and omnibus)
From #24: "However having a clean and unambiguous user interface is key. For example you could have a "Books by ..." section that showed the top 15 books (as at present) and a "Short Work by ..." section that showed the top 10 short works. Each section would have a "see all" link and a "combine/separate" link. A book might also have an expand/collapse toggle such that it could show its contents as well."
You could also then be a little stricter about what was listed as a "Work" (something published between two covers that, if it were published today, would be assigned an ISBN number). I would like to see Boxed Sets moved to this "Other" page (i.e. Each of the books in The Lord of the Rings is a "Work" while the boxed set is an "Other" or is relegated to "Series").
This could also help with works pages getting cluttered up by periodicals edited by the author (I am thinking old Sci-Fi mags here (Analog or Amazing Science Fiction) - the periodical would show up on the "Other Materials" page of the editor and the short stories included would show up on the "Other Materials" page of the author (with a link back to the periodical in the "Included In" field). While our busy Thingamabrarians are busy combining/separating "Works" they could also have a "This is not a Work" button that would relegate it to the "Other Materials" page (unless someone could come along and show that they DID in fact have a copy of Screwtop short story that was published ALL BY ITSELF (and not as part of the Tor Double Screwtop/The Girl Who Was Plugged In).
When you entered a new item the default could be the formatting for a "Work" but you could have a checkbox (like the "currently reading" / "to read" boxes) that - if selected - would change the fields to those appropriate for the type of item being entered. So for "short story" you would get a field for "title", "author", and "included in" - for the last you could choose from anthologies you had entered or perhaps even (remember I am playing Queen of LT here) anthologies/periodicals that other LTers had entered as containing that story.
You could keep the tagging/reviewing/etc. that you have for the works so you can tag/review/etc. each short story or the anthology as a whole.
32andyl
Yep I would bung Tim a few quid as well for full contents cataloguing.
For most of my collections & anthologies & magazines I have the short stories listed out in the contents in the form - "Contents: story A / author A -- story B / author B". It allows searching but isn't very friendly.
#31
Your drop-down idea doesn't work very well for me. I have (at the moment) 657 works tagged short stories. That would be one big dropdown. I agree that one would want to see "This story appears in works of which are in your library" and then a list of all the works (maybe with ticks against the ones you own).
I think on the entry side of things it would be better to enter them as you enter the work/book. Making it a collapsible section should prevent it taking too much room on the screen. This would be good as some libraries have "formatted contents" in their MARC records (at least for some books). These could be imported automagically by the import process.
I quite like the "Other Materials" idea.
For most of my collections & anthologies & magazines I have the short stories listed out in the contents in the form - "Contents: story A / author A -- story B / author B". It allows searching but isn't very friendly.
#31
Your drop-down idea doesn't work very well for me. I have (at the moment) 657 works tagged short stories. That would be one big dropdown. I agree that one would want to see "This story appears in works of which are in your library" and then a list of all the works (maybe with ticks against the ones you own).
I think on the entry side of things it would be better to enter them as you enter the work/book. Making it a collapsible section should prevent it taking too much room on the screen. This would be good as some libraries have "formatted contents" in their MARC records (at least for some books). These could be imported automagically by the import process.
I quite like the "Other Materials" idea.
33nsblumenfeld
>31 PortiaLong:
It is an interesting discussion what should be works and what should be other.
The ISBN thing doesn't work. I have a recently published professionally bound hardcover novel that doesn't have an ISBN because it was published by a seller and somehow didn't get one. I also have several perfect-bound chapbooks that are as long as some short novels with no ISBN.
The periodicals thing, yes, definitely. I've deleted magazines from my library because I didn't like the way they cluttered up the works pages of the people editing them. I'd love to see a way to differentiate periodicals. And how!
Anthologies shouldn't be other. They should stay in the main works page of the editor.
It is an interesting discussion what should be works and what should be other.
The ISBN thing doesn't work. I have a recently published professionally bound hardcover novel that doesn't have an ISBN because it was published by a seller and somehow didn't get one. I also have several perfect-bound chapbooks that are as long as some short novels with no ISBN.
The periodicals thing, yes, definitely. I've deleted magazines from my library because I didn't like the way they cluttered up the works pages of the people editing them. I'd love to see a way to differentiate periodicals. And how!
Anthologies shouldn't be other. They should stay in the main works page of the editor.
34monarchi
>33 nsblumenfeld: Anthologies shouldn't be other. They should stay in the main works page of the editor.
I think the suggestion was that anthologies should remain in the main works page of the editor, as well as in the "Other" listing for contributors – for example, as in the mock up below.
I think the suggestion was that anthologies should remain in the main works page of the editor, as well as in the "Other" listing for contributors – for example, as in the mock up below.
35lorax
34>
That looks WONDERFUL.
Of course, it would be a data explosion -- entering all the contents of my anthologies and short story collections would easily give me another 3000 works.
That looks WONDERFUL.
Of course, it would be a data explosion -- entering all the contents of my anthologies and short story collections would easily give me another 3000 works.
36nsblumenfeld
That is beautiful.
There would be a data explosion, but I would hop on it. It's brilliant.
There would be a data explosion, but I would hop on it. It's brilliant.
37vpfluke
On occasion, I've used tags for tables of contents, or for novellas. Particularly if few own the book and there is almost nothing about it at Amzon.com.
38muzzie
I consider anything sold separately as a book. Yes, this may include comic books, pamphlets, and other published materials. The length of a “work” does not determine whether it is a “book.” Works written in different periods vary greatly. Many of today’s readers have comic books, anime, and e-books on their library shelves in the same way the libraries of centuries past contained stone tablets with hieroglyphics, papyrus rolls, and handwritten manuscripts.
Many of my works have no ISBN. They are too old, too new, too specialized, or too obscure. The best answer is probably the long wished for collections feature. Contents of volumes containing multiple works could be listed on the edit page with a link to a contained in collections work page.
One would list the work, select from the drop down selection: short story, novella, or included book. The linked work page would allow for reviews, tags, and searches. One’s library would only list the major work with contained works accessible through a separated collections field. This would provide a more accurate works listing and keep the system moving.
The ability to perform queries addressing specific data would prevent corruption of statistical information. The present system allows over and undercounts of specific works affecting LT’s over all book count, recommendations, and algorithms used for various reasons.
Many of my works have no ISBN. They are too old, too new, too specialized, or too obscure. The best answer is probably the long wished for collections feature. Contents of volumes containing multiple works could be listed on the edit page with a link to a contained in collections work page.
One would list the work, select from the drop down selection: short story, novella, or included book. The linked work page would allow for reviews, tags, and searches. One’s library would only list the major work with contained works accessible through a separated collections field. This would provide a more accurate works listing and keep the system moving.
The ability to perform queries addressing specific data would prevent corruption of statistical information. The present system allows over and undercounts of specific works affecting LT’s over all book count, recommendations, and algorithms used for various reasons.
39jseger9000
#35 - Lorax,
Of course, it would be a data explosion -- entering all the contents of my anthologies and short story collections would easily give me another 3000 works.
I don't know if I'm opening a can of worms here, but I wouldn't want all the short sties I have to show as works in my library.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for having a contents field for anthologies. I started the thread after all. But I think of LT as a book site and like that it counts the 'books' I own.
Of course, it would be a data explosion -- entering all the contents of my anthologies and short story collections would easily give me another 3000 works.
I don't know if I'm opening a can of worms here, but I wouldn't want all the short sties I have to show as works in my library.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for having a contents field for anthologies. I started the thread after all. But I think of LT as a book site and like that it counts the 'books' I own.
40nsblumenfeld
That's the trick right there: having them exist as "miniworks," if you will, not as part of the Works page, not cluttering up an author's combined works page, but still each having a common knowledge field so we could see where and when they were originally published, which all anthologies and collections they're collected in, etc., and also allowing us, when we go to the work page of an anthology or collection, to see which stories are collected therein.
41ATimson
#31: You could also then be a little stricter about what was listed as a "Work" (something published between two covers that, if it were published today, would be assigned an ISBN number).
What about DVDs, computer games, or boxed sets of books assigned an ISBN?
What about DVDs, computer games, or boxed sets of books assigned an ISBN?
42monarchi
>40 nsblumenfeld: Good point. I love the idea of "miniworks." I think what we're asking for is that the Works structure become (even) more complex and layered, not that each short story exist as a separate work in the existing sense. That way, although there obviously would be a data explosion, it would be great to keep much of it behind-the-scenes. The casual user wouldn't notice a myriad more works, just enhanced capabilities for tracking the contents within those works that would exist anyway.
I totally agree with jseger that the catalog should stay focused on "books."
>41 ATimson: What about DVDs, computer games, or boxed sets of books assigned an ISBN?
Good point. I'm guessing, though, that a lot of people are adding these things anyway. Maybe a way to tag something as "This is not a traditional work" (e.g. boxed sets, some serialized comics, magazines, DVDs, etc.)
I totally agree with jseger that the catalog should stay focused on "books."
>41 ATimson: What about DVDs, computer games, or boxed sets of books assigned an ISBN?
Good point. I'm guessing, though, that a lot of people are adding these things anyway. Maybe a way to tag something as "This is not a traditional work" (e.g. boxed sets, some serialized comics, magazines, DVDs, etc.)
43infiniteletters
42: And the structure could work well for omnibus books too. :)
44nsblumenfeld
Another potential "not a traditional work" is individual monthly comics. These are not assigned an ISBN, but they are published individually. My own personal preference would be for them to be catalogued under whatever category short stories are under, and be included as contents of Trade collections in the same way, but others may feel differently.
45jjwilson61
Isn't that the same problem as magazines and other periodicals? I think they may need a different model then the book model.
46trollsdotter
>44 nsblumenfeld:
Well, not all comics have been collected into trades, and it is possible not to have all of the individual issues that comprise a trade.
At this time I feel that LT is not the place to catalog my comic collection. If I change my mind, I'll be entering them as individual works.
Well, not all comics have been collected into trades, and it is possible not to have all of the individual issues that comprise a trade.
At this time I feel that LT is not the place to catalog my comic collection. If I change my mind, I'll be entering them as individual works.
47nsblumenfeld
>46 trollsdotter:
See, I do have a vast comics collection, both trades and monthlies.
Trades I do catalog on LT.
Monthlies I do not -- I see them as more akin to individual short stories, or periodicals. But many comics creators combined works pages are cluttered with many individual comics entered.
What I was saying was that if this Contents Field for anthologies comes along with short stories being catalogued as something other than works (miniworks was the term I used), I think individual comics should go with them rather than as regular works.
See, I do have a vast comics collection, both trades and monthlies.
Trades I do catalog on LT.
Monthlies I do not -- I see them as more akin to individual short stories, or periodicals. But many comics creators combined works pages are cluttered with many individual comics entered.
What I was saying was that if this Contents Field for anthologies comes along with short stories being catalogued as something other than works (miniworks was the term I used), I think individual comics should go with them rather than as regular works.
48readafew
You would be more than welcome to do that, just don't expect me to do so. My little collection is cataloged and I like it as it is.
49muzzie
I've dreamed for over 50 years of owning a library with space to house it. Thirty years ago, a major move and financial problems set that dream back when I had to sell over 1200 books. Finding LibraryThing was like having a dream answered. I have my library, space to house it and a way to keep it organized enabling me to find what I want or need.
Many of the items on my shelves would not be classified as a book or be allowed on a works page based on some the criteria listed above. Yet, the information and entertainment contained within these items are what makes this library my own and the many years spent collecting and moving the boxes from state to state and house to house worth it.
I love my catalogue and I often play tag in the middle of the night. If items land in various places within a behind the scenes relational data base structure, I could care less as long as my library can remain my library.
Many of the items on my shelves would not be classified as a book or be allowed on a works page based on some the criteria listed above. Yet, the information and entertainment contained within these items are what makes this library my own and the many years spent collecting and moving the boxes from state to state and house to house worth it.
I love my catalogue and I often play tag in the middle of the night. If items land in various places within a behind the scenes relational data base structure, I could care less as long as my library can remain my library.
50PortiaLong
#42:
#31: You could also then be a little stricter about what was listed as a "Work" (something published between two covers that, if it were published today, would be assigned an ISBN number).
What about DVDs, computer games, or boxed sets of books assigned an ISBN?
I know people are entering these as works - but noticed how I added the modification "between two covers." Just because it does(or does not) have an ISBN should not be a SOLE qualifier as a "work." Being published by itself could be another qualifier.
For example - I don't consider the boxed set of The Lord of the Rings to be a "work" - I consider it a specific edition of the series. If you own a Boxed Set and I own The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers, and Return of the King (+/- The Hobbit) - as far as I am concerned we own the same books, being in a boxed set doesn't add any information. I DO consider The More Than Complete Hitchhiker's Guide to be a "work" as it was published as an omnibus work - in my catalogue I include it as a "work" with the tag omnibus and then catalogue the included "works" (which have been published independantly) with the tag inclusion. (See my profile for details). I would LIKE to be able to separately catalogue Young Zaphod Plays it Safe as a "miniwork" on Douglas Adams "Other Materials - Miniworks" page.
My point was that if you had another way of designating these items - such as on a "Other Materials" page then you could develop a more robust definition of "work" and relegate others to the "Other Materials" section. I mentioned that the reason I don't enter each short story in an anthology as a work is because I feel it would clutter up the "Works" page - I realize how HUNDREDS of Isaac Asimov short stories could seriously throw the "works" concept into complete disarray on the author page.
I would divide things up something along these lines:
Works
BOOKS - an individual bound item that you can hold in your hand and say "This is a book" and everyone would agree with you (- or anything that HAS been published that way even if you own it as part of something else)
Other Materials
Miniworks - short stories, short plays, poems, essays, articles - which were only ever published together with other works/miniworks in a collection/anthology/journal etc. - should have an "included in" field to link back to the collection/anthology/journal where YOU have it (on the individual page for that "miniwork" you could then see where everyone else has it - could be very helpful if you are looking for a seldom published short story)
Journals/periodicals/magazines - List the volume as a "Periodical" on the Editor's "Other Materials" page and each short story/ essay/ article under "Miniworks" on the contributor's "Other Materials" page with a "included in" field back to the periodical.
Related materials - calenders, cliff's notes, games, dvds
Boxed Sets (if you have to have them - I find this designation useless)
For the following I don't actually care which way you classify it - I would just like some consistancy:
Anthologies - could be listed as a "work" on the author page of the "editor" with each item included being listed in the "miniworks" section of the contributor (if an item has been previously published by itself it would be on the author's main works page with an "Included in" link to the anthology)
Encyclopedias - could have the "set" be the "work" and each volume a "miniwork" OR have each volume be a "work" and the whole set treated as a boxed set - I favor the first as sometimes different editions of the same encyclopedia have differing numbers of volumes and YOUR volume 8 may be "g-h" and MINE may be "f-g"
#49: Many of the items on my shelves would not be classified as a book or be allowed on a works page based on some the criteria listed above. Yet, the information and entertainment contained within these items are what makes this library my own and the many years spent collecting and moving the boxes from state to state and house to house worth it.
The point is that someone, like you, should be able to catalogue their entire (self-defined) library without having "non-works" included on the "works" page for everyone else - nothing that YOU enter is lost - it should still be in your catalogue and searchable/taggable etc. - it would just be found on the "Other Materials" page.
Enough for now I have to go to work...
Addendum:
#9: ETA - I just haven't figured out how to differentiate between single-author short story collections and multiple author collections. It would seem silly to have Me Talk Pretty One Day show up as all of the short stories under the "Contributed" section for David Sedaris.
I tag single author collections as collection and multiple author collections as anthology (see my profile for details)
#31: You could also then be a little stricter about what was listed as a "Work" (something published between two covers that, if it were published today, would be assigned an ISBN number).
What about DVDs, computer games, or boxed sets of books assigned an ISBN?
I know people are entering these as works - but noticed how I added the modification "between two covers." Just because it does(or does not) have an ISBN should not be a SOLE qualifier as a "work." Being published by itself could be another qualifier.
For example - I don't consider the boxed set of The Lord of the Rings to be a "work" - I consider it a specific edition of the series. If you own a Boxed Set and I own The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers, and Return of the King (+/- The Hobbit) - as far as I am concerned we own the same books, being in a boxed set doesn't add any information. I DO consider The More Than Complete Hitchhiker's Guide to be a "work" as it was published as an omnibus work - in my catalogue I include it as a "work" with the tag omnibus and then catalogue the included "works" (which have been published independantly) with the tag inclusion. (See my profile for details). I would LIKE to be able to separately catalogue Young Zaphod Plays it Safe as a "miniwork" on Douglas Adams "Other Materials - Miniworks" page.
My point was that if you had another way of designating these items - such as on a "Other Materials" page then you could develop a more robust definition of "work" and relegate others to the "Other Materials" section. I mentioned that the reason I don't enter each short story in an anthology as a work is because I feel it would clutter up the "Works" page - I realize how HUNDREDS of Isaac Asimov short stories could seriously throw the "works" concept into complete disarray on the author page.
I would divide things up something along these lines:
Works
BOOKS - an individual bound item that you can hold in your hand and say "This is a book" and everyone would agree with you (- or anything that HAS been published that way even if you own it as part of something else)
Other Materials
Miniworks - short stories, short plays, poems, essays, articles - which were only ever published together with other works/miniworks in a collection/anthology/journal etc. - should have an "included in" field to link back to the collection/anthology/journal where YOU have it (on the individual page for that "miniwork" you could then see where everyone else has it - could be very helpful if you are looking for a seldom published short story)
Journals/periodicals/magazines - List the volume as a "Periodical" on the Editor's "Other Materials" page and each short story/ essay/ article under "Miniworks" on the contributor's "Other Materials" page with a "included in" field back to the periodical.
Related materials - calenders, cliff's notes, games, dvds
Boxed Sets (if you have to have them - I find this designation useless)
For the following I don't actually care which way you classify it - I would just like some consistancy:
Anthologies - could be listed as a "work" on the author page of the "editor" with each item included being listed in the "miniworks" section of the contributor (if an item has been previously published by itself it would be on the author's main works page with an "Included in" link to the anthology)
Encyclopedias - could have the "set" be the "work" and each volume a "miniwork" OR have each volume be a "work" and the whole set treated as a boxed set - I favor the first as sometimes different editions of the same encyclopedia have differing numbers of volumes and YOUR volume 8 may be "g-h" and MINE may be "f-g"
#49: Many of the items on my shelves would not be classified as a book or be allowed on a works page based on some the criteria listed above. Yet, the information and entertainment contained within these items are what makes this library my own and the many years spent collecting and moving the boxes from state to state and house to house worth it.
The point is that someone, like you, should be able to catalogue their entire (self-defined) library without having "non-works" included on the "works" page for everyone else - nothing that YOU enter is lost - it should still be in your catalogue and searchable/taggable etc. - it would just be found on the "Other Materials" page.
Enough for now I have to go to work...
Addendum:
#9: ETA - I just haven't figured out how to differentiate between single-author short story collections and multiple author collections. It would seem silly to have Me Talk Pretty One Day show up as all of the short stories under the "Contributed" section for David Sedaris.
I tag single author collections as collection and multiple author collections as anthology (see my profile for details)
51monarchi
>50 PortiaLong: My point was that if you had another way of designating these items - such as on a "Other Materials" page then you could develop a more robust definition of "work" and relegate others to the "Other Materials" section.
...
The point is that someone, like you, should be able to catalogue their entire (self-defined) library without having "non-works" included on the "works" page for everyone else - nothing that YOU enter is lost - it should still be in your catalogue and searchable/taggable etc. - it would just be found on the "Other Materials" page.
I couldn't have put it better myself.
Thanks!
...
The point is that someone, like you, should be able to catalogue their entire (self-defined) library without having "non-works" included on the "works" page for everyone else - nothing that YOU enter is lost - it should still be in your catalogue and searchable/taggable etc. - it would just be found on the "Other Materials" page.
I couldn't have put it better myself.
Thanks!
