Difference between revisions of "Feature:90162"

From ISFDB
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Alternative - wiki notes?)
 
(copy original feature description from feature list page; responses to Bill's comments)
Line 1: Line 1:
I'm not sure how often we will need to add notes to COVERART, but when we do want notes visible it seems to clutter up the publication record.  E.g. "Cover shows a detail from ''Thor's Fight with the Giants'', Oil on Canvas, 1972, by Marten Eskil Winge, Nationalmuseum, Stockholm / Bridgeman Art Library". Actually, just looking at how I entered that makes me think it might be more appropriate to have such in the wiki instead. I can't see a major call for it in the database instead. It would SWAMP the existing notes for {{P|THBRKNSWRD2002|name=The Broken Sword}}, which already has to be classified as a Publisher Series Entry in the Wiki as we can't do that in the database yet. Although I see such data suggests our artist entry is inaccurate anyway. :-/ [[User:BLongley|BLongley]] 19:01, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
+
'''Better support for art notes.'''
 +
 
 +
In some cases, a work of art has a separate title from the work it illustrates. In some it is a detail from, or a re-use of, a pre-existing work of art, in some cases a classic many years old. In some that is particular information about the work that should be recorded. Currently it is possible to open a coverart or interior art record, and add notes, but is is unlikely that anyone will ever see there, because there is no link from a publication record directly to any art record, and no indication that any notes are present. There should be a direct link from the publication record to the cover art record (or records for a Dos-a-Dos work) and to any interior art records, and there should be a visible indicator if the notes field of any such record is non-empty. -[[User:DESiegel60|DES]] <sup>[[User talk:DESiegel60|Talk]]</sup> 17:09, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
 +
 
 +
:I'm not sure how often we will need to add notes to COVERART, but when we do want notes visible it seems to clutter up the publication record.  E.g. "Cover shows a detail from ''Thor's Fight with the Giants'', Oil on Canvas, 1972, by Marten Eskil Winge, Nationalmuseum, Stockholm / Bridgeman Art Library". Actually, just looking at how I entered that makes me think it might be more appropriate to have such in the wiki instead. I can't see a major call for it in the database instead. It would SWAMP the existing notes for {{P|THBRKNSWRD2002|name=The Broken Sword}}, which already has to be classified as a Publisher Series Entry in the Wiki as we can't do that in the database yet. Although I see such data suggests our artist entry is inaccurate anyway. :-/ [[User:BLongley|BLongley]] 19:01, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
 +
::In at least nine out of ten cases (probably more), there is no need for cover art notes, but there are cases where such are desired. For example, see {{T|836650|name=Cover: The Misenchanted Sword}}, where the note indicates that the artwork has a separate title, and suggests it was originaly intended for a different work, perhaps {{T|39555|name=this one}}. While a wiki solution is posisble, that won't make the notes visible to the average user either, and IMO such notes belong in the db at least as much as most of the publication notes we now enter. (And consider how often some editors are now adding a description of the cover art to the pub notes.) I agree that such notes would ideally not be in the pub notes, which is why i wanted a link to the coverart record, and some indication of non-empty notes associated with that link. -[[User:DESiegel60|DES]] <sup>[[User talk:DESiegel60|Talk]]</sup> 19:17, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:17, 30 September 2008

Better support for art notes.

In some cases, a work of art has a separate title from the work it illustrates. In some it is a detail from, or a re-use of, a pre-existing work of art, in some cases a classic many years old. In some that is particular information about the work that should be recorded. Currently it is possible to open a coverart or interior art record, and add notes, but is is unlikely that anyone will ever see there, because there is no link from a publication record directly to any art record, and no indication that any notes are present. There should be a direct link from the publication record to the cover art record (or records for a Dos-a-Dos work) and to any interior art records, and there should be a visible indicator if the notes field of any such record is non-empty. -DES Talk 17:09, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure how often we will need to add notes to COVERART, but when we do want notes visible it seems to clutter up the publication record. E.g. "Cover shows a detail from Thor's Fight with the Giants, Oil on Canvas, 1972, by Marten Eskil Winge, Nationalmuseum, Stockholm / Bridgeman Art Library". Actually, just looking at how I entered that makes me think it might be more appropriate to have such in the wiki instead. I can't see a major call for it in the database instead. It would SWAMP the existing notes for The Broken Sword, which already has to be classified as a Publisher Series Entry in the Wiki as we can't do that in the database yet. Although I see such data suggests our artist entry is inaccurate anyway. :-/ BLongley 19:01, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
In at least nine out of ten cases (probably more), there is no need for cover art notes, but there are cases where such are desired. For example, see Cover: The Misenchanted Sword, where the note indicates that the artwork has a separate title, and suggests it was originaly intended for a different work, perhaps this one. While a wiki solution is posisble, that won't make the notes visible to the average user either, and IMO such notes belong in the db at least as much as most of the publication notes we now enter. (And consider how often some editors are now adding a description of the cover art to the pub notes.) I agree that such notes would ideally not be in the pub notes, which is why i wanted a link to the coverart record, and some indication of non-empty notes associated with that link. -DES Talk 19:17, 30 September 2008 (UTC)