User talk:MartyD/Archive - July 2009

From ISFDB
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is an archived set of entries made to my talk page Feb 2009 - Jul 2009.


The Once and Future King

Hi MartyD. I've added the contents from one of the Berkley pubs and noticed that they both have the same page count. I would assume the contents would also be the same. If you bring up the pub[1] and click on "edit this pub" you can add in the page numbers. Thanks for editing!Kraang 01:24, 9 February 2009 (UTC)


Thanks. I didn't understand contents at the time. I will fix a little later tonight. --MartyD 23:09, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
I've added the numbers. I wasn't sure what policy was for page numbers; perhaps 2 should be added to each. I described how it appears in the notes. MartyD 01:24, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

The Mysterious Island

I approved the new notes in The Mysterious Island and then changed "January 1926" to "January 1962". Ahasuerus 17:36, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

I'll try to limit those typos in the future.... --MartyD 23:10, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

The Time Machine

Hi MartyD. I added a cover image[2] and while looking found another cover with a price of $0.50, so I cloned your pub and changed the price, then added the note about the later printing. I also changed the date to "0000-00-00" since it's unknown. Here's the result [3]. Hours and hours of fun! :-)Kraang 03:52, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Artist signature on Journey to the Center of the Earth

Does the signature look like this one? MHHutchins 01:38, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes! MartyD 01:48, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

The War of the Worlds and The Time Machine

I'm not sure were you got the link for the image but it would not have worked. Found this image[4] on Amazon is it right? If you need any help on finding images let me know.Kraang 02:04, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Found it on Amazon. Don't know what I did. Anyway, yes, that's the same cover. Thanks. MartyD 02:07, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
When you find the right picture just right click it and bring up the "Properties". What you need is the URL address.Kraang 02:23, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Hawksbill Station

Correct cover to [[5]] and the notes are fine. Never be afraid to add to verified copy notes as there will always be a moderator there to double-check them. I assume you have this book in hand? You can also do a Transient Verification. That way there are two sources for information if anyone needs to ask. Cheers! ~Bill, --Bluesman 02:18, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion. Never occurred to me to do Transient verifications.... (sort of a "duh" moment). MartyD 02:52, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
You will probably learn more from the "duh" moments than all the rest! Because someone here has had the same moment...... ! ;-) ~Bill, --Bluesman 05:18, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

SFBC edition of Dick's Three Stigmata

Does this pub have a gutter code? I'm trying to fill in the blanks in the SFBC listings. Thanks. Also I changed the publisher of Links to "Houghton Mifflin / BCE" because to the best of my knowledge it was not a SFBC selection. MHHutchins 14:54, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm also not certain that The God Project was a SFBC selection. I was in the club at that time and kept the announcement flyers and I can't find a listing for it. It's also not in any Locus listings. The club would sometimes enclose offers for selections from their sister clubs (The Literary Guild, Doubleday Book Club, etc.) Is it possible that's how you got a copy? Thanks. MHHutchins 15:04, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, no gutter code that I can find on The Three Stigmata. I will change The God Project to BCE, because I'm really not sure, except that I wasn't buying books from the other book clubs at the time, and this isn't one I would have gone out of my way to get. --MartyD 15:45, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Stranger in a Strange Land

I'm going to reject your submission which gives a date to this undated printing. The date you gave was for the first Ace printing. Quite often a publisher will retain the same statement for the first printing and use the number line to indicate the current printing. ISBNs can be retained over long stretches of printings, even though its original purpose was to identify different editions. In the 70s and 80s, some publishers would use different ISBNS for new printings, but over the past decade or so, they tend to keep the same ISBN. First they save money, because it costs them to register new ISBNs. Now they just change the price over the years, as is obvious in this case. Also, a paperback priced at $7.99 would probably be published circa 2000 instead of 1987. The original record was the 24th printing. According to the notes you added, your copy is the 31st printing. I'd suggest creating a new record, or you can clone this 24th printing and make the changes that reflect your copy. Thanks for your contributions. MHHutchins 23:08, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Ok. Will do. Sorry about that. In looking at it again, I found what looks like a March, 2000 date on an ad at the back. --MartyD 11:24, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Wit'ch Gate by Clemens

You've made a submission for the first paperback printing of this title, but there appears to be one already in the database. Remember that sometimes records are created which are incomplete. Some are simply placeholders and others have information that is generated through searches on Amazon.com. If you have the pub in hand, don't hesitate to update the record, especially those that are not verified. If there are slight differences you may have to make a judgment call. But on first printings, there shouldn't be a problem about whether the pub you're updating is the correct one. On later printings you may have to think twice about updating or correcting a current record. In this case the biggest difference appears to be the way the book is titled. If you're getting your title from the title page of the book itself, your edit will trump any editor who's simply looking at a cover scan of the book on an internet site. If the book is titled Wit'ch Gate in your copy, instead of Wit'Ch Gate as the record states, change the record. A moderator will then take into account all factors and decide to accept your edit or reject. And if they reject it, they'll let you know why. Even then, don't back down if you feel it was a good submission. Sometimes we moderators make mistakes too. I'm going to accept the submission because of the new information that you've added, and delete the one that's already in the database. Thanks. MHHutchins 04:25, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I wasn't sure what to do about it and decided to follow the "better to make a new entry" recommendation. I did not mean to make more work for you. I did save doing anything with Wit'ch Star, as it has the same issue, until I could see what a moderator thought of the other one.... --MartyD 11:06, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Citadel of the Autarch

Added a cover image to THCTDLFTHC1983 ~Bill, --Bluesman 17:37, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Order of author credit

I accepted your submission updating this pub, but the only change was the order in which the authors are credited. There's no need to try to place co-authors in any order because the database doesn't make any distinction between them, and randomly assigns the order. That may change some time in the future but presently there's nothing we can do about it. MHHutchins 17:53, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

I had done a clone and thought I missed getting the authors in the right order.... --MartyD 23:52, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Claw of the Conciliator

Added a cover image to THCLWFTHCN1983 and corrected an html in the notes. Instead of < li > in front of the second line there was only < which (I think) changed the font size for the rest of the pub entry or was the print really tiny when you did the edit (in the verification section under the pub data before clicking into the edit page)? ~Bill, --Bluesman 17:59, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

No, I'm sure it was my fat fingers. Thanks for fixing it. Too bad there isn't a "preview" for post-edit, pre-submission... --MartyD 23:54, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Race Against Time by Piers Anthony

Hello Marty - I don't know if you monitor your watch-list but in case not then I replied to your message at User talk:Marc Kupper#Race Against Time by Piers Anthony. --Marc Kupper|talk 01:16, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, yes, I do. --MartyD 01:31, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

The Houses of Kzinti

I made a few changes to your verified pub. The two pieces by Ing are novellas, published in 1988 and 1989, but combined into one collection (marketed as a novel) call Cathouse in 1990. That's where the single copyright date comes from. The Children's Hour is the 1991 expanded novel version of the 1989 novella of the same name. Thanks. MHHutchins 02:57, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Off the Beaten Orbit

Added a cover image to FFTHBTNRBT1961 --Bluesman 01:20, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

The Disappeared

I updated your verified pub THDSPPRD2002 with an non ZZZZZ artwork (same image) and expanded the notes slightly. - Thanks Kevin 16:20, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Cluster Command: Crisis of Empire II - title correction/author correction/notation

Hello Marty! This. [6] , Please Pull out your copy. Mine definitely gives the title as I put it above. William C. Dietz is actually W. C. Dietz. That means another d pseudonym. I also found a partial signature for Paul Alexander. Redid notation as well. I hope this does not offend. If I am wrong, this is definitely different. Thanks, Harry. --Dragoondelight 23:03, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Harry. I couldn't possibly be offended. Given the date on the verification, I have a feeling I just verified an existing entry, and I probably didn't know enough at the time to argue with what was there at a detailed level. :-) I notice [Locus1 calls it Crisis of Empire II: Cluster Command... But the copyright page has it as you cite. --MartyD 00:48, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Morning Marty. Any time I edit something, please feel free to 'wring' it out. I think it is the best way to handle it for the users. I actually hate messing, some people are a tad 'frenetic' about 'their' vers and with others they just drop them. Of course, the past players makes me feel like I am walking through a crypt. I appreciate the fix. Thanks, Harry. --Dragoondelight 11:42, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
You two don't seem to have finished this off, so I did the title-author correction, series entry, and pseudonym creation - please check. (Next step - get the review of this as by "Bill Dietz" sorted.) BLongley 23:52, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, didn't realize there was more to do. What's there looks ok to me. Thanks for fixing it. If there's more that should be done (or if you run into a case like this again) let me know. Any lack of doing is from not knowing better, not from willingess to give it a try. --MartyD 00:40, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Images

Finally took the time to check the images you've added and they all look fine. Have you noticed that quite a few of the 'fantasticfiction' ones are blurry? From the source, I mean. Have finally had a scanner up and working for a little while now and am entering my entire collection onto my computer as I go through and have found a lot of their images (many of which I put there the first time) to be quite blurry. And I noticed the other day a note that one of their image links broke! Most strange. Cheers! ~Bill, --Bluesman 03:53, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I've noticed both cases: blurry ones and broken links as I've been going through verifications. I usually spend quality time poking around on Amazon, as often I can find a good one there. But sometimes Fantastic Fiction is the only place I have any success.... --MartyD 10:53, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
There's also [[7]] for vintage paperbacks. ~Bill, --Bluesman 14:56, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Mightiest Machine

Very strange...... just added an image to [[8]], left a note on Alvin's page and there was the same note from you! There was no image when I got there. Is the submission still sitting in your queue? ~Bill, --Bluesman 18:14, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

No, there's no sign of my edit at all now, in fact (neither recent nor pending nor rejected). I remember the cover well, and I did submit it. I must have put an entry about the change on your page, too, since you're listed as transient. Didn't I? Maybe I'm losing it. --MartyD 10:26, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
You wouldn't be the first!!! LOL! Every once in a while I forget to hit the 'submit' button..... ~Bill, --Bluesman 20:50, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Sheckley's Can You Feel Anything...

Is there a comma in the title as it appears on the title page of this publication? Thanks. MHHutchins 18:12, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

No. And, in fact, I think the title should probably be just Can You Feel Anything When I Do This? (with no trailer). The dust jacket cover has that title in bold over a horizontal line over an unbolded "And Other Stories". The title page uses just the first part. In addition, the two references on the inner flap and an otherwise blank pre-title page all use just the first part. Want me to fix it and include these notes and make a variant title? I see there's a DAW pub listed with just Can You Feel Anything When I Do This? too. --MartyD 00:46, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
We have to go with the title page, so please adjust the pub to match that. Thanks. MHHutchins 02:03, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
Ok, done. --MartyD 02:17, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Orbit One

There appears to be two very similar records for this pub. Can you please see if one should be deleted? Thanks. MHHutchins 02:01, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I didn't notice the other one when editing the above. I combined the notes and deleted one of them. --MartyD 02:27, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Five-Odd

Added a cover image to [[9]]--Bluesman 20:48, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

That looks like the one. --MartyD 19:04, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Einstein Intersection

Added a couple of notes to [[10]] ~Bill, --Bluesman 19:16, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Jewels of Aptor

Added a note to [[11]] from Currey. ~Bill, --Bluesman 19:57, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

The War Machine--added cover artist note w/ signature present

Afternoon Marty! This. [12] . I added that the cover signature was present. Thanks, Harry. --Dragoondelight 20:39, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Oops. Don't know how I missed noting that. Thanks. --MartyD 00:54, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Galactic Pot-Healer (SFBC)

Did a Currey verification and added a note to [this] pub about 'gutter-code=printing date [not publication date]'. Since the SFBC editions have no publication/printing data (other than the few times they 're-dressed' a trade edition) it's a good addition to the notes to specify the source for the year/month, if known. Up until 1984, that source, if it already is in the pub record, will most likely be Tuck (as the current SFBC data on the ISFDB pages comes from that source). If you still have the original flyers from the club, PLEASE let Mike Hutchins know!!! We're both trying to complete the SFBC puzzle and any input is always welcome. As for the gutter code and printing dates, you can always use [this] page to correlate. From what I have seen, you are doing excellent edits and seem to 'get' a lot of the oddities of the database. Also like that you ask the right questions. The Mods like that, as it is easier to teach a willing 'pupil' than re-educate an unwilling/uncommunicative one. I speak from personal experience, as my 'education' has been..... interesting, to say the least!! Keep it up, rookie! And always remember to have fun. ~Bill, --Bluesman 02:16, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words. I'm actually going through all of the books I went through the first time, now that I know a little better what I should be doing. Haven't re-gotten to the SFBCs yet. I don't have any of the flyers, but Michael did point me to the SFBC and Gutter Codes pages, so I will double-check whatever dating I did and also fill in any holes I notice. --MartyD 02:46, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

World Jones Made

Added a cover scan to [[13]] ~Bill, --Bluesman 20:54, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

That's the one. Thanks! --MartyD 11:40, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Invaders

Did a cover swap for [this] pub as yours had the second printing cover and the second printing had the cover from the first. Second printing has the Baen logo up from the bottom with the ISBN underneath. In the first printing is Ricochet spelled Richochet in the table of contents as it is in the second printing? ~Bill, --Bluesman 03:14, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

The image you put on the 2nd printing is the image that matches my cover. The one you put on the 1st printing does not match mine. On my copy's cover, the logo is up from the bottom with the ISBN running vertically underneath. I double-checked my book, and it has "First Printing, November 1985" with no number line or other printing info. An after-page ad says "Available December 1985 from Baen Books" (for Killer Station) and has a 2-page excerpt from Rogue Bolo described as coming in January 1986.... ?? --MartyD 11:47, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
This is most strange, as there were only the two printings of this book, so I (incorrectly, it seems) assumed the one I "moved" was for the first printing.....!? A phantom cover without a home! I know sometimes there is an 'advance' image, minus blurbs, etc. that usually shows up on Amazon but this is a 20 year old edition.... Most odd. I will replace the image with the correct one but save the odd-ball in my database. Maybe there is an import or a trade paper out there without a cover?!?! Thanks for checking this out! ~Bill, --Bluesman 03:49, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Just put the image on my computer and blew it up to take a closer look and it is the same image for both editions but this one simply cuts off about 1 1/2" of the bottom. Replaced it anyway, so all is as it should be. And I was looking forward to finding that phantom edition...... the thrill is in the hunt! ;-) ~Bill, --Bluesman 03:54, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
I seem to recall at the time having a hard time finding the one that matched my cover. Although my cover-finding skills were certainly far less practiced than they are now, here a whole month later... :-) Besides, we got a bonus out of all of this: look at all the additional notes I have now for the first printing! I will have to keep my eyes open in my travels for a copy that has the logo at the bottom. Thanks for rechecking it. --MartyD 10:17, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
p.s. The TOC does misspell Ricochet as Richochet.

The Electric Sword-Swallowers/Beyond Capella--added notation

Morning. This. [14]. I added notation and credit for frontispiece illustration. Thanks, Harry. --Dragoondelight 12:46, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Harry. I'm almost to the point of re-checking all of my doubles (see above comment about re-checking all of my SFBCs....). --MartyD 13:20, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Marty, I just do checks against what I have. A lot of my books need reworking as I have learned (a little). We are apparently in the same boat. LOL. Thanks, Harry. --Dragoondelight 14:44, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Marty, Coach Paul has a tendency to drop his verifications, so you have to recheck. No sense leaving a primary blank. Thanks, Harry. --Dragoondelight 14:44, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Jeff Jones

In case you did not see my answer. J. Jones should be treated as a pseudonym.--swfritter 02:05, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

The Mark of the Cat----my clone of

Morning!. This. [15] . I cloned of you and created this. [16] . Yes, I always overdo and I am not trying to get you to do that. I do not wish to 'sand bag' you, so I am wondering if you missed the "Introduction to the Outer Regions". If you do not wish to record it that is okay, but if you missed it was an essay and separate from the novel story, then I thought you should see what I did. If you disagree with my treatment feel free to chastise me. Apologies. Thanks, Harry. --Dragoondelight 12:05, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Harry. Seems likely I missed it. I normally add excerpts and other content other people skip, so I doubt I'd have omitted it if I had noticed it. I will check on it tonight or this weekend. I of course now feel completely free to plagiarize your copious notes, if they're applicable.... :-) --MartyD 13:59, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Any use anyone has for my doggerel is no prob. I do that, whenever I can. This one was an oddity, that I only found after playing with it, so if I did it right or not is somewhat in the air and a second look most appreciated. Thanks, Harry. --Dragoondelight 14:56, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Mine does have the same introduction. I just didn't notice it. I will update the pub accordingly. Thanks for catching it. --MartyD 15:57, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Asimov's Foundation and Earth

I suspect that this pub is not a book club edition, but one printed for the Canadian market. That may account for its lack of price and the maple leaf. Check to see if there's anything on the copyright page about Canada, either printed in or for, or any mention of Doubleday Canada. Thanks. MHHutchins 19:18, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

I certainly don't know what it is, but other than that mark, there's not even a hint of Canada. Neither is there any mention of Book Club(s). Or printing locations (other than the "Garden City, New York" under "Doubleday & Company" on the title page). See User_talk:Bluesman#Foundation_and_Earth_price_question for some of the other details Bill and I went through. If you think I should remove the "/ BCE" and add a comment that I don't really know what the silly edition is, I'm happy to do that. As you've probably noticed, I'm not afraid to be clueless. :-) --MartyD 21:30, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
FYI, I don't know how authoritative it is, but here's a Book Club Editions section of a first editions guide, and it mentions "maple leaf" among the blindstamps (and I learned a new word!). Echoed in this Book Club Edition discussion. --MartyD 11:12, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

The Two Towers (Introduction) vs Introduction (The Lord of the Rings)

Morning. This. [17] . This concerns the Peter S. Beagle introduction. I found an old set of The Lord of the Rings of the same time period along with the Hobbit. They all had the Peter S. Beagle introduction. I therefore came to the conclusion that the Introduction was a generic for the prelude and three parts of The Lord of the Rings. To make this easier I changed my introductions to Introduction (The Lord of the Rings). This. [18] . If you check the introduction section of the notes hopefully it will be understandable. I am not saying change yours, but I wish you to be aware of how I changed things to reflect that Peter S. Beagle wrote only one essay. Thanks, Harry. --Dragoondelight 11:13, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

More notes for me to plagiarize... er... use as source material! I will check my copies, but if they're all the same, I agree with your approach and will change those entries to match what you did. --MartyD 11:23, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
Please, always double check me as I jump to conclusions. LOL Just did not want to leave you without a heads up to what I did that might affect your work. Thanks, Harry. --Dragoondelight 14:05, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
Yes, the Beagle introduction is the same. Each has an untitled/uncredited synopsis on the facing page that differs from book to book, but it doesn't seem to be part of the Beagle intro and not to be confused the the "Foreword" in The Fellowship of the Ring or the "Synopsis" in each of the other two books. I will change the titles. --MartyD 16:19, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
I changed the title and added the intro as content to the other two pubs (Fellowship and Return). I decided to add "Foreword" as content to Fellowship and Synopsis as content to each of the other two, since we've got other front matter identified. I did not add content for the "Lord of the Rings" poem or maps. I used most of your note about the introduction but didn't try to replicate the other notes. Details make my brain hurt. --MartyD 16:49, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

The Dragon Masters / The Five Gold Bands (Ace Double F-185)

I updated a broken cover image for your verified pub TDMTFGB1962. - Thanks --Rtrace 10:12, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

That's the one. Thanks. --MartyD 17:01, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Dragons of Autumn Twilight

I added a cover image to your verified pub DRGNLNCCHR0000. - Thanks --Rtrace 04:05, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

That's the one. Thanks. --MartyD 09:44, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations, you are now a bot!

Just a note that I have marked your account as a "bot" account, which should make those annoying math puzzles go away when you post links. Please let me know if it causes any problems! Ahasuerus 05:45, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Every Bot account comes with one free oil can (half full). Refills are your responsibility if the tin-man rusts up and you are out of oil. Kevin 05:55, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
No math puzzles at 6am? Aww..... --MartyD 10:33, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Does that come with attachments? Thanks, Harry. --Dragoondelight 14:57, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
So far, I'm only aware of the 1/2 can of oil. --MartyD 15:10, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Apparently it also now comes with the half can of oil, and a (Insert prize announcing voice) Brand New Shiny CLOAK of INVISIBILITY. SO be sure to keep that oil can at the ready, because if you rust up, no-one else will even see you to know you need help! On a serious note. I realized this morning that all of your edits to the Wiki are now hidden (as a bot) when You, I or anyone visits the special:Recentchanges page. To even notice you we have to click the 'show bots' link at the top of the page every time, and I didn't see an option to turn that feature 'off' in my preferences. Thoughts? (I don't think its a good thing... but I'm not you). Kevin 15:52, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Drats, foiled again! Oh well, you are no longer a bot, please return the oil can to a recycling center near you. Ahasuerus 16:48, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for the thought. --MartyD 20:25, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Just a thought! Has anyone checked to see if there is 'invisible bot talk' from the other bots? Al, Ahasuerus and Bill Longley are pretty good! Thanks, Harry. --Dragoondelight 21:01, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
We are not bots! Dissembler, Fixer and Data Thief are. And Data Thief doesn't do much now as he requires frequent fresh backups to work with and a mid-size project to work on. Very primitive abilities really in comparison with the others, but can be trusted with some grunt-work when it's very clearly explained. BLongley 00:16, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
I don't know. How can we be sure? The rumors have been going around. And Ahasuerus was been making some odd-sounding comments over on the Community Portal the other day.... --MartyD 00:49, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
After a few years of ISFDB, you will be making odd-sounding comments... ;-) It's one of the dangers of the job. BLongley 00:59, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
Just because 95% of the population thinks that doing bibliographies as a hobby is odd doesn't mean that we are! Well, maybe just a little bit... Ahasuerus 01:13, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
I compute the percentage as over 99.9% but that is from UK demographic data and other bots human's experiences may vary. I shall now prove I'm human by going to recharge my batteries sleep, perchance (34.1% probability) to dream. BLongley 01:32, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
It depends on the audience. Salesmen, middle managers and country club types find it really weird while engineers, programmers and other "OCD-magnet" professions are more receptive. Scientists and lawyers are somewhere in the middle since they recognize that bibliographies are useful, but don't mind it (at all) that other people do the work for them. Mathematicians are briefly interested by some of them issues that we have to face, but there is not enough complexity to hold their interest for long. Oh well, to each his own! Ahasuerus 03:07, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Quick wins

I've recently noticed that the "Amazon UK" link beside a publication doesn't work for pubs with an ISBN-13 rather than an ISBN-10. I've not seen the code, but it should be fairly trivial to make sure the software uses the ISBN-10 for the ASIN rather than the ISBN-13? BLongley 12:00, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and one old one that I've always thought should be simple - fixing the "AND NOT" in advanced search. That looks as though it just needs a space added between the words. BLongley 12:00, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Good ideas, thanks. There's also a bug list out on SourceForge I have yet to look at. --MartyD 16:14, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
Fixed the "AND NOT" search - it was indeed a missing space in biblio/search.py. BLongley 19:02, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Merlin's Mirror Question on interior art?

Morning! This. [19] . I noticed you verified the 'fourth' and I have the 'third'. Cover art is the same. The interior art is page 2. I believe the squiggle at center right of sketch is the infamous "Jg" of Jack Gaughan. No pressure. Thanks, Harry. --Dragoondelight 14:09, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

I'll take a look. Might not get to it until tomorrow or Wednesday (busy both tonight and tomorrow night). --MartyD 16:16, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
It is indeed. Looks a bit like the grass.... Thanks. Updated. --MartyD 00:34, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Three Against the Witch World

I added a cover image to your verified pub THRGNSTTHB0000. - Thanks --Rtrace 05:05, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

That's the one, thanks. --MartyD 00:25, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Local ISFDB

I've got it serving pages OK, but haven't got the login to work. The create_user.py script failed, as there are "not null" constraints on several columns of mw_user: I removed the constraints. Then it failed as there's no mw_user_groups in the latest backup. I copied an old one I had: I presume it still looks like this? 

CREATE TABLE `mw_user_groups` (
  `ug_user` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL default '0',
  `ug_group` varbinary(16) NOT NULL default 
) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8;

submitlogin.cgi seems to succeed with a "Logged In" message but that doesn't stick and the "Not Logged In" remains on the left-hand side. I presume this is a cookie problem of some sort. Do I need a value for "user_token" or one of the other columns? BLongley 16:42, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh yeah, create_user.py -- I had a problem with that, too. I'm not sure dropping the constraints is a good idea, just in case something in the code can't actually cope with the nulls. I suggest changing this line:
query = "insert into mw_user(user_name) values('%s')" % (username)

to 

query = "insert into mw_user
(user_name,user_real_name,user_password,user_newpassword,
user_email,user_options,user_token,user_touched)
values('%s','','','','','','','')" % (username)
(all on one line). Don't forget that the user you create should have a capitalized first letter. I think if you get "Logged in" but no anchor under that to go to index.cgi (or whatever page you had tried to access that required a login), the look-up of the name did not work. Your definition of mw_user_groups looks like the table my database has (from the 4/25 back-up).
I can't see the new insert working any better, it's just a different way of inserting nulls into columns that don't accept them isn't it? There's no non-null defaults. BLongley 21:43, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Ha ha. I just realized upon re-reading this block that I didn't <nowiki> the quotes I used to make empty string values instead of nulls in the example above. No wonder you thought it was the same. Fixed it above. --MartyD 01:21, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
And yes, I did remember the initial capitalisation. I was initially trying the same username as I use on the live ISFDB and thought that might be a problem with cookie clashes, but a username of "Local" doesn't work either. I do get the anchor if I use such a link rather than the plain dologin.cgi. BLongley 21:43, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
In my clean re-set-up, I am now seeing the same lack-of-being-logged-in you are. It does sound like a cookie issue. Probably one of the local definitions. I will check it out. --MartyD 17:28, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
I've added
LogFormat "%h %t \"%{Cookie}i\" %>s \"%r\"" cookie
and
CustomLog "logs/cookie.log" cookie
to the httpd file and it seems I'm not getting cookies sent at all. Googling suggests that "localhost" is a special case for PHP setcookie, might it be for Python too? BLongley 21:43, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Empty strings are different than null. --MartyD
Except in Oracle, my usual RDBMS. BLongley 23:35, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Nulls don't always behave the way you would think in SQL. --MartyD
I'm used to that. But I'm not sure where the problem is here. Do you think "-" in the log means Apache is sending something? BLongley 23:35, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
The cookies get sent from Apache back to the browser, but then the browser doesn't send them back again. Localhost must have something to do with it. I modified login.py to remove the domain setting, and it then works fine:
print 'Set-Cookie: isfdbUserID=%s; path=/; expires=Fri 8 Sep 2037 15:00:00 PM CST' % (user_id)
print 'Set-Cookie: isfdbUserName=%s; path=/; expires=Fri 8 Sep 2037 15:00:00 PM CST' % (user_name)
print 'Set-Cookie: isfdbToken=%s; path=/; expires=Fri 8 Sep 2037 15:00:00 PM CST' % (user_token)
# print 'Set-Cookie: isfdbUserID=%s; path=/; domain=%s; expires=Fri 8 Sep 2037 15:00:00 PM CST' % (user_id, HTMLHOST)
# print 'Set-Cookie: isfdbUserName=%s; path=/; domain=%s; expires=Fri 8 Sep 2037 15:00:00 PM CST' % (user_name, HTMLHOST)
# print 'Set-Cookie: isfdbToken=%s; path=/; domain=%s; expires=Fri 8 Sep 2037 15:00:00 PM CST' % (user_token, HTMLHOST)
I'm sure it worked ok for me before because I normally don't use localhost in my Apache configuration (which I use for other things) and I didn't check when I switched to localhost instead of my machine name for the instructions.
And the answer is: In localdefs.py, use 127.0.0.1 instead of localhost for everything except DBASEHOST:
HTMLLOC	= "127.0.0.1"
HTFAKE	   	= "cgi-bin"
DBASEHOST  	= "localhost"
HTMLHOST   	= "127.0.0.1"
COOKIEHOST   	= "127.0.0.1"
Cookies will then work. Sorry about not noticing that. I will fix the instructions.
Still not working, despite login.py and localdefs.py changes. :-( Still, I haven't tried the "reboot your PC" thing yet. BLongley 23:35, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
The logging you did in Apache shows what cookies are being sent from the client. So the "-" will mean you didn't get any, which is pretty much what we know. Were you using 127.0.0.1 as the host name in the browser? And, if so, is your browser by any chance blocking cookies from 127.0.0.1? (BTW, you don't need the login.py changes if using 127.0.0.1). You might check that the dates on the .pyc files in cgi-bin are later than your edits to the .py files; perhaps it's not actually using your edits. --MartyD 23:51, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Same problem for 127.0.0.1 and localhost, both in IE and FF. Neither has cookies blocked. Dates on .pyc files are definitely later than the .py ones. BLongley 10:48, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
If you have a way (HttpWatch or some such for IE; Firefox has a plug-in that will do it) to see the headers that Apache is sending back, check that the Set-Cookie headers have domain=127.0.0.1 (instead of domain=localhost). --MartyD 00:00, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
I've set the cookies for isfdbToken, isfdbUserid and isfdbToken manually via firecookie and it'll let me edit, although it still insists I'm not logged in. That'll do for the moment. Which plug-in do you recommend for header inspection? BLongley 10:48, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

(unindent) That's rather special, isn't it? I wonder if there's something else wrong in your database (perhaps there's more beyond the missing table). I will look at how it decides to tell you you're logged in (may not get to this for a few hours). People I work with use Live HTTP Headers with Firefox, although I think it does not work in 3.1. I use HTTP Analyzer, but I have a license for it -- I don't know if they have a trial version. Looks like HttpWatch has a free version. There's also Http Sniffer. --MartyD 12:05, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

The "Logged In" handling is based strictly on reading the cookie as passed from Apache to the CGI process via the HTTP_COOKIE environment variable. And it looks to me like no special modules are needed to have that be set. --MartyD 12:40, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
Well, it looks like it's sending them:
Set-Cookie: isfdbUserID=5; path=/; domain=localhost; expires=Fri 8 Sep 2037 15:00:00 PM CST
Set-Cookie: isfdbUserName=Local; path=/; domain=localhost; expires=Fri 8 Sep 2037 15:00:00 PM CST
Set-Cookie: isfdbToken=11111111111111111111111111111; path=/; domain=localhost; expires=Fri 8 Sep 2037 15:00:00 PM CST
But Firefox isn't storing them. Noscript isn't blocking 127.0.0.1 or localhost, Adblock Plus isn't, Firefox says cookies are accepted. Nothing in my Anti-Virus logs or Firewall logs. BLongley 13:26, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
That's the problem. Are you sure you have "127.0.0.1" in localdefs.py -- the one that's out in your cgi-bin? The cookies should show "domain=127.0.0.1" (domain=localhost is what causes the browser not to send them back):
Set-Cookie: isfdbUserID=1; path=/; domain=127.0.0.1; expires=Fri 8 Sep 2037 15:00:00 PM CST
Set-Cookie: isfdbUserName=MartyD; path=/; domain=127.0.0.1; expires=Fri 8 Sep 2037 15:00:00 PM CST
Set-Cookie: isfdbToken=; path=/; domain=127.0.0.1; expires=Fri 8 Sep 2037 15:00:00 PM CST
That domain= string is filled in using the HTMLHOST variable from localdefs.py (in login.py). --MartyD 11:06, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Working now - I think I must have been switching ALL localhosts to 127.0.0.1s and back as I tried things out. Have you figured out what each of the variables is for? As some seem a bit dodgy: e.g. pp_search.py ends with a link generated using HTFAKE, but ap_search.py ends with a similar link generated from DBASEHOST and hard-codes the /cgi-bin (which is going to be a problem for IIS isn't it?). BLongley 17:40, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
I did not study their usage, other than to note that HTMLHOST is being used where you'd expect COOKIEHOST to be and COOKIEHOST is not being used at all. There's probably a few odds and ends not really working properly outside of the production environment. Another thing that could be cleaned up. --MartyD 18:17, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Their usage is probably something we should document now we have multiple active developers. I don't think we can expect Al to do it. BLongley 20:54, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
Good idea. We can put comments right in that file. --MartyD 09:37, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

From the Ocean....

Added/copied a cover image for [[20]] Could you take a look at the notes for the SFBC edition. Is this "Biographical note" in the trade edition? And is the artist credited on your jacket? Also, I have what may be a trade edition disguised as a BCE as the copyright page has the usual story copyright section, then the usual "All rights...." statement followed by "first edition" then the LOC # then "Printed in..." with the rest of the page blank. Wondering if Doubleday printed the trade edition for Harcourt or just forgot to clear up the copyright page? Thanks. ~Bill, --Bluesman 04:36, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

I will check tonight or tomorrow morning. --MartyD 14:14, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
...or "tomorrow" night. Mine has $4.50 on the front flap. Art credit is simply "Jacket design by Arthur Hawkins" on the rear flap. There is no biographical note, other than on the back flap, but do you suppose Contento could be referring to the Introduction? It is actually a biographical note, if you read it. My copyright page matches what you describe. Mine has gutter code C48 on p. 515. What else would you like to know? --MartyD 23:48, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, Marty. The "Bibliographical note" that Contento notes [here] would appear to be between pages 165 and 167. I don't have a cover for my copy to nail down the SFBC connection, but from what you have it would appear that the trade edition was printed by Doubleday for Harcourt. This is not all that unusual. I'll leave a note on Marc's page and not change anything until he can chime in. Appreciate the feedback. ~Bill, --Bluesman 00:31, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
None in my copy. The Deep Range ends on p. 165, followed by blank, followed by * The Other Side of the Sky, followed by blank, followed by the first page of "The Nine Billion Names of God" on unnumbered, followed by p. 170. Mine may be some other edition, although it does have the price. --MartyD 01:08, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
It appears Contento constructed the record for From the Ocean, from the Stars by including the full contents of the The Other Side of the Sky record but did not notice that the original introduction was not included. It's also curious that he did not state the price. I'm guessing he has the BCE.
The retail/trade edition states "LCCN# 62-8058" which implies a 1962 release. This also fits in with the C48 gutter code that edition has. The main evidence for 1961 is that the omnibus introduction is dated 1961.
I've scanned/uploaded my cover and the image from Amazon was poor and started Publication:FRMTHCNFRM1961 to document this in more detail but need to run errands. --Marc Kupper|talk 19:55, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Eureka: A Prose Poem

I'm confused about the binding of this publication. "Cloth binding" on a trade paperback? Thanks. MHHutchins 15:37, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

And well you should be. Don't ask me why my fingers typed that. Fixed; thanks for catching it. --MartyD 16:06, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Added note about cover

I added a note about the cover art for your verified 2nd printing of Berkley Medallion edition of Siodmak's DONOVAN'S BRAIN. Noted that the art of this printing was altered to remove the image of a half-naked woman from the foreground of the artwork used on the 1st printing.Don Erikson 17:01, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Interesting. Thanks. --MartyD 00:40, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

The Million Year Hunt / Ships to the Stars -- small changes + Tuck

Afternoon! This . [21] . I did a Tuck upon matching my copy to your ver. I changed to page 83 and 100 the last two story and interior art credits. I added J to the Gaughan signature on cover and added (bottom right) for location. I added (bottom left) for the EMSH location. Beautiful job. Thanks, Harry. --Dragoondelight 20:50, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Looks good, thanks. --MartyD 10:44, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

The Power that Preserves

Is the essay 'What has gone' intended to be titled 'What has Gone Before' as mentioned in the notes of The Power That Preserves? If so, I leave the correction to you. Thanks Kevin 04:14, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Oops, yes. Thanks. And I see the error got propagated. I fixed the title and left a note for Rtrace, who verified the next printing. --MartyD 10:55, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Rama II

Your new pub for Rama II had the date for the first printing. Undated reprints get a date of 0000-00-00. The list of features has an entry for adding a reprint field so we can order undated reprints based on the first printing but currently we just make notes. Your notes are nice and clear so I just zeroed the date. Thanks. Dana Carson 23:45, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, sorry. I cloned the 1st edition and forgot to zero the date. Thanks for fixing it. --MartyD 00:02, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

There Will Be Time

Added a note with gutter codes from two later printings to [[22]] ~Bill, --Bluesman 02:54, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Hearts & Lions

Added a cover image to [[23]] --Bluesman 03:15, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't think that looks like my copy's cover at all. I will check on it tonight. --MartyD 09:56, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Not even remotely like my cover. Mine's cream-colored with two yellow lions about 1/3 the width of the cover in the top left, and three big red hearts in the lower part, intermingled with the words from the title. --MartyD 00:40, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Local ISFDB - Pulliam

Marty - I have the database and everything setup on a machine on my network. I'm trying to set it up so that http://D400/ acts as a local ISFDB on my network (Where D400 is a defined machine name in my local DHCP setup). Instead of 127.0.0.1 in my setup I used D400 everywhere, but I left localhost for the DBHost. Problems I could use some help with...

  1. Login is not sticking
  2. I have no local graphics (No banner, no colors, no tables, etc) either when browsing to D400 from the host machine, or another machine on my network.

Here is what I have in localdefs (updated as described in later post) 


HTMLLOC	= "D400.net"
HTFAKE	   	= "cgi-bin"
DBASEHOST  	= "localhost"
HTMLHOST   	= "D400.net"
COOKIEHOST   	= "D400.net"
USERNAME   	= "root"
#PASSWORD   	= "XXXXXX"
PASSWORD   	= ""
DBASE      	= "isfdb"
UNICODE	= "iso-8859-1"
DO_ANALYTICS	= 0

Your advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks Kevin 05:14, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

One thing that comes to mind is that, as Marty pointed out on Bill Longley's Talk page the other day, "Domain-less host names (i.e., "localhost") do not get the cookies sent back to them. You need either an IP address (e.g., 127.0.0.1) or a domain or fully qualified host name (foo.com or foo.bar.com). So while http://localhost/cgi-bin/index.cgi and http://127.0.0.1/cgi-bin/index.cgi are equivalent, the browsers will not send cookies back on the former." Ahasuerus 05:49, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Two different things:
1. The domain-less host name is indeed likely the login-sticking problem. Is this a Microsoft/Windows network? If so, your machine may have a domain as well. Try doing from a command prompt: nslookup D400. If you get back a qualified name, you should be able to use that. You could also just use the assigned IP address. If the machine is regularly on, it will continue to have the same IP address, even under DHCP (ipconfig from a command prompt will show you the IP address).
2. Lack of images, etc., sounds like the HTML portion of the installation is missing (has the logo and style sheets). These normally should be in the "root" web directory. E.g., http://D400/biblio.css, http://D400/isfdb_logo.jpg, and so on. In a default Apache installation, the root is mapped to \Program Files\Apache Software Foundation\Apache2.2\htdocs. The ISFDB/build process puts the files there based on the setting of INSTALL_HTML in isfdb2\INSTALLDIRS. I don't trust various tools to handle spaces in directory names properly, so I use the short-form, 8.3 names. If everything's in the default location, INSTALLDIRS would look like:
   INSTALL_CGI     = c:/progra~1/apache~1/apache2.2/cgi-bin
   INSTALL_HTML    = c:/progra~1/apache~1/apache2.2/htdocs


You may want to double-check what you have specified. Also, if you do a full make -B install, the 2nd to the last line of output will show you where it REALLY tried to copy the files. E.g.,
   cp biblio.css isfdb.gif isfdb_logo.jpg index.html c:/progra~1/apache~1/apache2.2/htdocs
That may provide a further clue. Please follow up and let me know. On the host name/address front, if you have access to things like DNS and/or system32\drivers\etc\hosts, there are several relatively easy alternatives. --MartyD 13:00, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Also look for any compile errors when you do a make. On my Linux machine I was pointed to the wrong INSTALL_HTML directory.--swfritter 13:43, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
I got the login sticky fixed, added D400.net to HOSTS on both the server machine and on my primary machine, and changed the D400 to D400.net in the localdefs and rebuilt (I also changed the example above to what I'm using now). Thanks! I still have no stylesheet or local graphics (the covers hosted by amazon etc show up just fine). I browsed to http://d400.net/isfdb_logo.jpg and /biblio.css and got a 403 'Forbidden' message on both of them. They are present in the c:/progra~1/apache~1/apache2.2/htdocs directory, and watching a make session confirms they are being copied into that directory. IT must be something in apache that's causing a problem... Advice welcome (and I'm digging on my own too) - Thanks! Kevin 14:02, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
I pullied the following from my apache logs
[Sat Jun 06 08:49:34 2009] [error] [client 192.168.22.123] (OS 5)Access is denied.  : file permissions deny server access: 
 C:/Program Files/Apache Software Foundation/Apache2.2/htdocs/biblio.css, referer: http://d400.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi
[Sat Jun 06 08:49:34 2009] [error] [client 192.168.22.123] (OS 5)Access is denied.  : file permissions deny server access: 
 C:/Program Files/Apache Software Foundation/Apache2.2/htdocs/isfdb_logo.jpg, referer: http://d400.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi
Thanks Kevin 14:06, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
The error suggests the Apache process cannot read the files (the "OS 5" -- if it were a configuration problem the message would tell you access was denied by the configuration). What version of Windows? Can you access the files directly? You can take a look in Services and see what account the Apache service is running under. You can also stop the service, CD to \program files\apache software foundation\apache2.2 and do bin\httpd. With that running, try http://d400.net/isfdb_logo.jpg and see if the behavior is any different (your own permissions vs. the Apache service's permissions). I'd also take a look at the security on the htdocs directory vs. on the cgi-bin directory (in the explorer, right-click and properties, security tab). It sounds like the cgi-bin directory is accessible, while the htdocs directory is not. It is easy enough to make htdocs be elsewhere -- just make a directory anywhere, put the files into it, and modify apache's conf\httpd.conf, replacing C:\Program Files\...\htdocs with the directory you just made; restart apache and give it a try. --MartyD 14:25, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Success! After uninstalling and Reinstalling Apache I still had no luck. I had already looked at folder permissions, but a post online reminded me to look at file permissions as well. Turns out that the 'SYSTEM' group which Apache is running as, had no permissions on the biblio.css or the images files. I manually added SYSTEM with full access to those three files, and success! - Now to see if I can break it with my meager coding skills MWU-HAHAHAHAHAHA - Thank you VERY much for your tech support time and effort! 16:06, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Great! You should check the advanced security settings on htdocs -- it may not be set to propagate permissions to child objects properly. Otherwise, you may be in the same boat the next time you do a full build. If you need more a pointer than that, let me know. And happy breaking! --MartyD 18:08, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations! Please don't hesitate to update the instructions page or even create a sub-page if the case merits it! Ahasuerus 19:30, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Watchers of the Dark

Added a cover image to [[24]]--Bluesman 00:35, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Looks good, thanks. --MartyD 09:54, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Ace double F-123

Added both artists to [[25]] courtesy ACE Image Library, with notes to same. Pub needs more notes though, when you have the time. Like the new screen that comes up with a new pub submission. Think it should come up with every submission. My 2¢ CDN. ~Bill, --Bluesman 04:02, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

I dug up my copy and will see what I can do when I get a chance. --MartyD 16:40, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Notes submitted. --MartyD 12:37, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Code Investigation - Icons and Banners

Marty - Have you noticed that the top ISFDB Banner is different on your development box from the live server? I looked in the top level directory of the code and there are banners and a favicon that are not getting copied to my apache ht folder. I'm quite capable of copying them myself, but I was wondering if you felt up to taking a look at the make script and see if there is a line commented out or that needs to be added to 'make' my development box appear the same as the live server? I feel we should track down any inconsistencies like this so that anyone can 'deploy' an ISFDB at home with the same look and feel without becoming a coder. (If this is beyond you, or over your head, I'll take a crack at it myself, - Who knows, maybe I just did something wrong). Kevin 03:18, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

It's different on my local server as well. We have used a number of banners over the last few years, so the software may be serving an older version of the gifs based on some obscure algorithm (file date?) Ahasuerus 03:26, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm quite sure the files are not there (htdocs). I looked. It's something in the make scripts, or similar location, that isn't installing the banners. (I imagine Al manually installed the new banners when the rotation was put in). Kevin 03:28, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Ah, I see! At least one of the gif files is in Al's home directory, so it may not have been picked up when Al uploaded the scripts to Sourceforge. Ahasuerus 03:46, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, I didn't get to look at it tonight. If you add them to SourceForge (or send them to me, and I'll add them), I'll double-check that the scripts will do the right thing with them. --MartyD 03:52, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Many (most/all but the one?) of the missing files are on sourceforge, and do download to the isfdb2 code directory on checkout. Kevin 03:59, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
The only file that I was sure was different was isfdb.gif. The live version (from Al's home directory) had a more elaborate image, so I sent it to Marty. Ahasuerus 04:15, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
You're not looking at an image on your local server, check it again and you'll probably see it's http://www.isfdb.org/IsfdbBanner4.jpg - the live one is currently http://www.isfdb.org/IsfdbBanner2.jpg. Which still implies a module version mismatch - css/biblio.css on the live server presumably points at Banner 2 now but the one in CVS only shows Banner 6 changing to Banner 4, which is why the local server points at it. Personally, I like it to be different, it makes it easier to see which version you're looking at in which tab. But we should probably change it to point to a local copy for truly offline use. BLongley 17:16, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
When I compared the live server and the local server yesterday night, it looked like I had the same IsfdbBanner* files, but isfdb.gif was different. The local one had a white 3 by 5 catalog card with no text on it while the live one at www.isfdb.org/isfdb.gif had biblio data for The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress. Now that I am thinking about it, there may have been a difference between the local and the live versions of www.isfdb.org/isfdb_logo.jpg, but I'd have to check. Not a huge deal, of course. Ahasuerus 17:35, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
The logo is a different issue. It varies by which version of the Navbar you're looking at, and sometimes it's isfdb_logo.gif and sometimes isfdb.gif. Switch between home page and moderator page for example. That does seem to be pointing at local copies though. BLongley 18:20, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
I can't check until later tonight, but I found this problem a few days ago when I was testing a fix by alt-tabbing between "live" and "local". The logos that were displayed were definitely different, but I'll have to check the date/time stamps of the underlying files on the live server and Sourceforge to see when they diverged. No worries, we'll get it all synchronized... eventually! :) Ahasuerus 19:11, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
I thought it was a rotation going on, but I will check all of it tomorrow. --MartyD 01:42, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
And the answers are:
  1. The isfdb.gif in CVS (plain card catalog card with isfdb on it) is different from the file used on the live site (the fancier card catalog card).
  2. The biblio.css in CVS is different from the file used on the live site, and that file is where the banner image is chosen. The one in CVS uses IsfdbBanner4.jpg, while the one on the site uses IsfdbBanner2.jpg.
  3. The banner image is hard-coded in biblio.css to refer to http://www.isfdb.org/ instead of the current server.
  4. The build process does not install the banners (and technically nothing in the built code uses them....).
The first two problems are simple enough -- I can just update the files in CVS. But I do think I should modify the build process to use a biblio.css template and have installation insert the host name into a local copy the way it does for other files (and then also have the process install the banner images). --MartyD 11:24, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
I say Document it as a bug in the sourceforge files, and do it. All of our code should be site generic. If a someone wants to take the ISFDB system and replicate it at myownpersonalisfdb.org, it should all work as whole, from a single sourceforge download. Kevin 13:41, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
Agreed. If nothing else, we want the software to work for offline users, e.g. for someone who is testing the software while flying. Ahasuerus 15:42, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
In that case, we ought to provide a script to remove image links. BLongley 17:09, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps a script to 'disable' image links. (Click here to turn off image hotlinking) or something similar? Kevin 17:22, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
Bah Humbug - Flying time is reading time, not testing time (Chuckle - I love getting paid to read for 6 hours!) Kevin 17:06, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
P.S. And I will leave the uploads etc in your capable hands, Marty, since I am I trying to concentrate on testing/deployment. Ahasuerus 15:44, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
Yes, will do. --MartyD 15:46, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Amazon URLs

Thanks for rerplacing a ZZZZZZZZZ Amazon url with a more stable one. However, there is a further adjustment that pays off. A URL such as http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41MKH0HHP3L._SS500_.jpg can helpfully be converted to http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41MKH0HHP3L.jpg ommitting the _SS500_. which codes for, and forces, image size. It can result in a white box around the iamge when displayed on the ISFDB, and is generally not desirabnle. See ISFDB:Image linking permissions#List of sites granting permission for more info. -DES Talk 13:12, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh I see you made this correction in a later submission. Thanks. -DES Talk 13:35, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
The minute I saw the XML from the submission, I realized I had forgotten to remove it.... But of course by then it was too late. --MartyD 14:53, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
No harm done. if I hadn't noticed, your 2nd submisison would have overwritten it anyway. -DES Talk 15:15, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Series Fiction Display Bug?

Take a look at Isaac Asimov and his Black Widowers Series. Some of the items appear at the top in 'Fiction Series', and some of the items appear below in 'Short Fiction Series', while all appear in the series list which displays the series only. I think this is new behavior from either one of the first three changes. I'm also going to point Bill at the problem, I think you both were doing various updates to series displays and short fiction displays. Kevin 02:49, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Answered on Bill's Talk page. Ahasuerus 03:01, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
See User_talk:BLongley#Series_Fiction_Display_Bug.3F. --MartyD 10:20, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Ace DBL F-187

Scanned in individual cover images for [this] and did up the notes. At about 25 minutes prior to this posting the DB basically went dead. You programming guys 'messin' with stuff??? Most changes that I can see I like, though I'm not sure what the "view this pub" after a submission is for when a simple back-click does the same thing??? I still want to see the final look of the submission before the submit button.......¿ ~Bill, --Bluesman 05:34, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

After I submitted this three copies showed up..... FYI! ~Bill, --Bluesman 05:38, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Other than Ahasuerus and Al von Ruff, none of us "programming guys" has access to the live server whereby to mess with anything. Server problems, however, are a common occurrence. You might add your voice to any of:
You can see you are in good company. --MartyD 10:12, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
For feedback on this last set of features, you should comment at ISFDB:Community_Portal#Patch_r2009-03 or at Talk:Development. I'm not sure what you mean about "three" copies. Of what? This section or your pub edit submission? --MartyD 10:12, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
This section. Server exceptionally slow at times tonight as well. I'll check out the other posts. Thanks! ~Bill, --Bluesman 02:34, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Don't know what would do that. Pub additions look good. Thanks! --MartyD 10:10, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Doomsman/Telepower

Scanned in an image for[this] and added a couple of notes. ~Bill, --Bluesman 02:31, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Looks good, thanks. --MartyD 11:51, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

VT display mockup

Mockup done. See User:DESiegel60/Mockup. Feel free to ask any questions about it. Note that this is only a suggestion, which might be improved on, or simply rejected. -DES Talk 15:49, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you for the work on this - it's very useful to see the various currents vs. various proposed. I doubt I can do it justice tonight (still monitoring temperature stability on this PC for safety reasons) and maybe not tomorrow (new ultra-mini-pc to setup) but I'm giving this priority over normal moderating and other code changes. BLongley 20:05, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Marty - I don't know if you've looked into Chapterbook series display, but as my changes for r2009-05 will allow that at last, it might be wise to test the two sets of changes together? BLongley 20:05, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Yes, indeed. I run with everything most-recent. Are you aware of any good test authors/series for it? --MartyD 09:57, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
Well, there's no existing series to look at as you can't create such currently. And as editing them breaks them immediately, there's few genuine Chapterbooks left in the database. (Advanced title search for title type of 'CHAPTERBOOK' does find those though.) Some, like Susan's Journey are definitely part of the Narnia Series but they're scattered all over the place, some with derived authors and some uncredited and some credited to C. S. Lewis... just have a play with NOVELs under 50 pages or so, I'm sure people will be doing that anyway when it goes live. It's the price I'll have to pay to keep certain Books visible as such. BLongley 19:34, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
I already suggested Asimov and Heinlein as authors with many titles and many pubs per title and at least some variants. Joseph Sheridan Le Fanu has a lot of variants, including Carmilla that seems to have appeared under 6 different versions of the author's name. Gordon R. Dickson dropped his R for some parts of his working life. Iain M. Banks never uses that name for his non-genre books. So either of these might be a good test, although neither is, i expect, a real stress-test. Perhaps R. L. Fanthorpe is a good, if extreme, test case? -DES Talk 15:45, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
Silverberg and Kuttner/Moore may be good test cases performance-wise -- lots of Titles, lots of VTs (including collective VTs), lots of Publications. Ahasuerus 17:05, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
No performance problems that I see. Kuttner/Moore show lots of the interesting variations. --MartyD 17:16, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
Excellent! And I have just posted a possible minor enhancement on the Community Portal. Ahasuerus 17:21, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
Another good test case might be the "Tom Swift" series. And those famous authors "anonymous", "unknown" and "uncredited" - if the system can cope with the last of those, performance for any other author should be fine. BLongley 19:43, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
"uncredited" takes only about 2 secs to display with current code, accessign the live server over the net with a fast connection. It also has relatively few VTs: the current code displays "Variant" only 7 times, and "as by" only 20 times in the whole "uncredited" summery biblio display. -DES Talk 20:02, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
Tom Swift displays almost instantly on the live server, and almost every title has a VT. Not a bad test, although probably not many pubs to check. -DES Talk 20:04, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
"anonymous" appears to have only one VT that uses "as by" and that is for "uncredited :). -DES Talk 20:07, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
One final thought before I go back to the new PC - have we fully tested with multiple authored titles? E.g. Mark Smith and Julia Smith writing together as Julia Gray sometimes and Jonathan Wylie at others. (My baptism of fire when I was learning Variant authors.) I know we've dealt with Kuttner and Moore and Kuttner alone or Lewis Padgett, and at first glance the Smiths look fine, but I'm sure there's a house name or two that will stretch us. And co-authored with pseudonym, like Lester del Rey and Erik Van Lhin. There's a slight discrepancy on "with Author B" versus "and Author B" on some displays, but that might be intentional and seems harmless. BLongley 20:14, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
I have not. I will leave that to someone else, as I have no more time to give it. The code is checked in for all to have their respective ways with. This particular code has no changes to the author information display itself -- the logic changes only involve titles; authors are tacked on the way they always have been (with the exception of inserting "only" or "also" before "as by". It's extremely likely things are displayed elsewhere and in other ways, perhaps deliberately to illustrate different ways of displaying things, perhaps accidentally due to code duplication. We will have to uncover and tackle those one at a time. --MartyD 20:20, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
I will tag the "ready to go" revisions of all affected scripts with "r2009-05" tonight and then we can all jump on them and test them to destruction. Ahasuerus 20:49, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
I've tested them (not to development conventions, I didn't exclude non r2009-05 updates) and they seem fine. A comment... After seeing it in action, I'm not a huge fan of 'only as by' on a single line. I think I much prefer the old behavior of just 'as by' on a single line. See William H. Keith, Jr. for an overwhelming example of a single author with multiple pseudonyms. Kevin 00:58, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
I think there's two camps out there -- the group that cares a lot about knowing whether a title has been published, and a group that really doesn't and would rather have a cleaner display. That latter group lost out, although it's now easy enough to change. FWIW, I'm in that latter group. --MartyD 02:26, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Recent VT screenshot/mockup

In the "Mrs. Gaskell" example, was "The Old Nurse's Story" ever published under the name "Mrs. Gaskell"? The answer is that we have no record of such a publication, but this can't be determiend from the screenshots above. Ahasuerus's proposal seems to call for the text "only appeared as:" in this case, but it is not in the screenshot. Was that an oversight, or an intentional change? I chose this example in significant part because it has a work with multiple variants but which never appeared (as far as our records show, they are quite probably incomplete in this case, as new pubs were added within the past month) under the canonical (parent) author/title combo. -DES Talk 15:30, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes. THFNTNBKFG1971, THFNTNBKFG1964, and SMLLSHDWSC1974 in my 6/13 back-up of the database. That is why it appears as it does. The Grainger example has a similar scenario, but where the canonical title is unpublished and shows how it would look: a trialing "only appears as: " would follow -- that's what Ahasuerus's list called for. On the Summary Bibliography, the "by Author Name" immediately after the title would not be present, but it would otherwise look the same. --MartyD 15:57, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
My error. Then i will try to find another example of this situation. Thanks for putting up with my nitpicking, and thanks for all your work on this. -DES Talk 16:15, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
Sorry to be dense, but what scenario are you trying to see that isn't covered by the The Halcyon Drift in the Grainger example? Maybe I can find something for you. --MartyD 16:18, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm not quite sure -- maybe there really isn't one. It would be nice to find a single example that includes a) works with single VTs published under both canonical and non-canonical name; b) works with single VTs published ONLY under the variant name c) works with multiple VTs published under both canonical and non-canonical names; d) works with multiple VTs published ONLY under the variant names; e) works with single VTs where the title is different, published only under the variant name. But a single comprehensive example like this is not essential. I think we have all the above cases, except e, covered soemwhere in our existing examples. Ah On looking at the matter further, what I was thinking of was a work with multiple VTs, and no pubs under the canonical author name at all. That isn't true of The Halcyon Drift, but it doesn't really present any display issue that The Halcyon Drift doesn't already show. Ignore that man behind the curtain. -DES Talk 16:29, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Ace Dbl 05595

Is there a source for the publication date posted in the notes for [this]? ~Bill, --Bluesman 02:39, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Good point - I have checked Double Your Pleasure and added it as the source. Thanks! Ahasuerus 02:51, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Now that was quick! Kudos! One thing I have not figured out is how to flag pages to know when answers to questions have been posted. I'm active enough to (normally [whatever that is]) find them eventually, but it would be nice to be on top of things better. How????¿¿¿¿ ~Bill --Bluesman 03:38, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Well, the easiest thing to do would be to check "Recent changes" (see the "navigation" list on the left) now and then. You can make that list more user-friendly if you first go to "my preferences" (see the options at the very top of any page), choose the "Recent Changes" tab, select the "Enhanced recent changes (JavaScript)" box and click on "Save". That way the Wiki will group related changes and make them easier to browse. There are other useful options under "my preferences" as well.
In addition, you can use the built-in "watch list". Whenever you edit a page, it is added to your watch list unless you deselect the "Watch this page" checkbox at the bottom of the editing screen. You can then check your watch list at any time by clicking, not surprisingly, "my watchlist" at the top of any page. This can be very useful when dealing with high volume Wikis like Wikipedia, which processes so many changes per minute that using "Recent Changes" becomes overwhelming. We are still fairly small, so "Recent Changes" works reasonably well and I haven't been forced to use my "watch list". Yet :) Ahasuerus 04:04, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, I got it from the ACE Image Library. I will add that to the notes as well. --MartyD 13:51, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Non-Genre Series

It seems that an omnibus or two prevents a non-genre series from being displayed as such. Just entered a complete Bulmer series, FOX, and even though all the individual titles have been designated non-genre there are two Omnibus editions that seem to be preventing the whole series from descending to the non-genre ranks (where it so richly belongs). Is there a way to get around this? ~Bill, --Bluesman 22:21, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

See ISFDB:Community Portal#Non-genre series with omnibus -- a bug? for discussion. -DES Talk 22:33, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Added artist credit

I added cover credit to your verified [26] from the artist's Wikipedia page.Don Erikson 18:24, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Great, thanks. --MartyD 01:04, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Bug 2815548

When you get a chance, could you please take a look at Bug 2815548? The description provides a couple of examples which suggest that there may be something wrong with the VT display logic under some obscure circumstances. TIA! Ahasuerus 01:28, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I saw it. I'm guessing they're variants of variants, but I will look at it tomorrow. --MartyD 01:43, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
My guess was wrong. These two, and two other titles, have an incorrect setting from days of yore. TITLE_CTL is 1 for them, yet the default is zero and nothing in today's code ever sets it to anything else. There's a test of this field in the display that behaves differently when the value is 1. The fix is:
select title_id, title_title from titles where title_ctl = 1;
update titles set title_ctl = 0 where title_ctl = 1;
You'll see the titles, and it will update those four. I wouldn't bother with a script for it. Let me know if your results vary. I can add the above as the comment to the bug and mark it "fixed" (term used loosely). --MartyD 11:16, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
I think I remember it now. At one point I was working on Dave Wolverton's biblio and realized that the "as is" logic wasn't doing quite what we wanted it to do for the "only as by David Farland" records. We didn't fully understand the behavior at first, i.e. "only as by" vs. "also as by", and Al thought that it was some kind of weird exception which we needed to add a flag for. Then we realized that it wasn't an exception but rather a whole class of cases and that we would need to go to the Publication level to fix it. At that point we stopped since we didn't want to affect performance, hence the abandoned "title_ctl" field which was only used for the 4 test cases. Looks like we have finally addressed the last of the issues arising from that discovery! :) Ahasuerus 05:51, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

A TALE OF TWO CLOCKS date code

I see that your verified edition [27] of Schmitz A TALE OF TWO CLOCKS book club edition shows a date code "D6" while my two copies say "D8". Are mine a later printing?Don Erikson 18:24, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, my eye doctor appointment is next week, but I double-checked, and mine is clearly "D6" at the bottom right of p. 206. Page numbers are in square brackets, b/w picture of Schmitz and a beagle on the back, and the bio on the back says he wrote his first science fiction story in 1949 and "now" lives with his wife in Inglewood, California. "Book Club Edition" at bottom of front flap, "Printed in the U.S.A." at bottom of back flap. --MartyD 19:33, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Well mine has all the above points but they both definitely say "D8" on page 206. I think mine must be a later (probably 2nd) printing. Maybe the demand outpaced the original print run estimation.Don Erikson 00:28, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://isfdb.org/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:MartyD/Archive_-_July_2009&oldid=259939"