If you add librivox to the search it does - and it adds the youtube one/s tooI tried "Ulalume Poe" - the poem by Poe which is in a collection here and individually searchable. It did not come up in the first 6 pages of my Google search.
Anne
If you add librivox to the search it does - and it adds the youtube one/s tooI tried "Ulalume Poe" - the poem by Poe which is in a collection here and individually searchable. It did not come up in the first 6 pages of my Google search.
That's exactly what I meant, thank you for correcting it! But yes, I think it would be a shame if we were helping our search results... but finding out that in all 6 versions, the same person reads Chapter 1-5 (of 6 total Chapters) ((For example)).
What's going on here?!?!?! Don, TriciaG, we're not in high school anymore and trying to earn patches and badges to wear on Boy/Girl Scout uniforms. Are we? Are YOU? Concern over your personal COUNTS sounds like someone who is try to bolster their ego. Surely that's not you, is it? The LV Prime Directive doesn't speak to earning bragging points, I'm pretty sure. To bring up such concerns is not worthy of your considerable reputations. Lop of this branch of specious reasoning, please.DACSoft wrote: ↑April 19th, 2019, 11:17 amI wholeheartedly agree! My justification was along the lines of your last bullet point, although my example was a book of short stories. Suppose I solo such a book with 20 stories. Then I decide I want to extract the 20 stories and apply them as 20 contributions to various short story collections. I've done almost no additional work, but now have contributed to 21 projects (the equivalent of 40 "chapters" with only 20 recordings)!
To me this feels like "cheating," and diminishes the time and value of the work that others spend in recording 40 "chapters" for 21 projects. I fully support the restrictions of not reusing recording files at LV.
Don
You aren't, I am not, I bet Tricia and Don aren't. But for sure there are volunteers who aim for that. I've noticed such attitude. And yes, I feel there is no such directive, toowilliamjones wrote: ↑April 20th, 2019, 5:50 am Don, TriciaG, we're not in high school anymore and trying to earn patches and badges to wear on Boy/Girl Scout uniforms. Are we? Are YOU?
Great info here! Thanks.Availle wrote: ↑April 20th, 2019, 2:21 am Hi there William and thanks for your patience
Looking at your post from above, I don't want to comment about the first paragraph, really. I don't think a websearch is a good example. I don't know how google etc. organise their databases, but I would assume that there are plenty of redundancies and multiple entries in the databases that come in simply because of how a webcrawl is done. When they then report the findings, surely those redundancies come into play and you will find a number of results pointing to the same website (even though that might be a different entry in the database). I'm assuming a lot here, I have no idea, so that's why I don't want to get into this.
<snip>
The toggle you're suggesting is already implemented, it's a checkbox <how is this accessible?> whether a project is classified as a collection or not. If YES, then the following two things happen:
<snip>
In a sense, we are already doing better than that, because we do index collections "produced" by LibriVox by section and not just by overall title.
<Great news!>
I didn't say it was a concern for me personally. I said it was one of my "top-of-the-head questions/comments" to this topic. (That said, I AM proud of the amount I've recorded, and I do wonder where I stand relative to others. At one time I think I was #3, but then that stat functionality went away, so I no longer know. So maybe I AM sometimes thinking about my girl scout badge. So what?)williamjones wrote: ↑April 20th, 2019, 5:50 am
What's going on here?!?!?! Don, TriciaG, we're not in high school anymore and trying to earn patches and badges to wear on Boy/Girl Scout uniforms. Are we? Are YOU? Concern over your personal COUNTS sounds like someone who is try to bolster their ego. Surely that's not you, is it? The LV Prime Directive doesn't speak to earning bragging points, I'm pretty sure. To bring up such concerns is not worthy of your considerable reputations. Lop of this branch of specious reasoning, please.
LibriVox's definition of a "collection" is a project with multiple text sources, and (sometimes) multiple authors. It is to be able to cite the different text sources, not simply for search functionality. So no, your Iconoclast project is not a LV collection.I am delighted to learn that the toggle that I hypothesized does in fact exist: Collection or Standard Book (i.e., non-Collection). The inherent difference between these two types of project is the interdependence of the contained sections. In a Standard Book each section/chapter unwinds more of the story's progress and is interconnected with the preceding and subsequent sections. However, in a Collection each section has its own start, middle and ending... i.e., is independent.
"...filling the catalogue..." Filling? Do let's avoid hyperbole in serious discussion.
I am aware of that. But the data to be entered into the database has to come from somewhere, and for google's databases I would expect them to come from a webcrawl As I said, I am not familiar with google's intricacies, which are different than ours, so let's not go there.williamjones wrote: ↑April 20th, 2019, 6:38 am Great info here! Thanks.
You mentioned "webcrawl" in your first paragraph and "card catalog" soon thereafter. Allow me to remark that "walking the tree" of a relational database is a different algorithm from either of those other activities.
Technically, yes.Can this be done:
I am BCing a project ("The Complete Works of Brann The Iconoclast Volume 1"), each of section of which is an independent newspaper article written by William Cowper Brann in his own newspaper, "The Iconoclast". Please, classify this project as a COLLECTION.