COMPLETEThe Cambridge Medieval History, Vol 2, The Rise of the Saracens and the Foundation of the Western Empire - iq

[pnagami]

Ok. Thanks!

Pam

[icequeen]

I am willing to MC this project, but I need to know what you are expecting to do. It appears to me that you are planning, or were planning, to make all the authors searchable by making this a type of collection? I would to prefer not to have this project handled in this way. There is only one source, therefore the "author" should either be "Various" or the editor. The only time we would make this a collection is if there were many sources contributing to the whole project. I like the way that the titles of the sections in the MW are set up, that's perfect! But making all the different authors searchable will only skew the search results. I think the way this gets affected is that the software attributes all the sections to each author. So, if we have one author with one work recorded here at LV, the author would be shown as having 106 different results in the search because of this project. (I think that is how that works.) Plus, it is way too much work to have to enter all that data into the database for one person. We are volunteers, we don't need to do more work than is necessary.

Let me know what you would like to do. Then I will decide if I will pick this one up.

[InTheDesert]

I am willing to MC this project, but I need to know what you are expecting to do. It appears to me that you are planning, or were planning, to make all the authors searchable by making this a type of collection? I would to prefer not to have this project handled in this way. There is only one source, therefore the "author" should either be "Various" or the editor. The only time we would make this a collection is if there were many sources contributing to the whole project. I like the way that the titles of the sections in the MW are set up, that's perfect! But making all the different authors searchable will only skew the search results. I think the way this gets affected is that the software attributes all the sections to each author. So, if we have one author with one work recorded here at LV, the author would be shown as having 106 different results in the search because of this project. (I think that is how that works.) Plus, it is way too much work to have to enter all that data into the database for one person. We are volunteers, we don't need to do more work than is necessary.

Let me know what you would like to do. Then I will decide if I will pick this one up.

Hi Ann,

It's kind of you to consider picking this up.

I think I've been misunderstood about the authors thing - I wasn't intending a collection since it's a single-text work, as you said. I was proposing a project with many authors. That's the same as a normal project but all the authors get added to the author field for the whole project. Only admins can do that after the project has been launched but a person generating a new project can add lots of authors (like I did). Then when it's catalogued, it appears as the first two authors 'et al.'

A good example is here. There are seven authors linked to it in the catalogue (even though only two appear). The sections are not searchable (eg: sections 6 and 7) so they don't clutter the catalog. But the whole project appears (once) when you search for any of the authors (eg: sections 6 and 7).

But now that the authors I added have been deleted, you would have to go in and add them again which would probably be a nuisance. So I'm happy if you just set this up as 'various' and we leave it

[Owlivia]

I'd like to claim
Section 9, Roman Law Part 1 by H. J. Roby, please.

It will be a while before I can begin this; I'll revisit this page then to get the necessary upload coding.

Be well, and may your holidays be joyful.

[InTheDesert]

I'd like to claim
Section 9, Roman Law Part 1 by H. J. Roby, please.

It will be a while before I can begin this; I'll revisit this page then to get the necessary upload coding.

Be well, and may your holidays be joyful.

Done!

[icequeen]

I am willing to MC this project, but I need to know what you are expecting to do. It appears to me that you are planning, or were planning, to make all the authors searchable by making this a type of collection? I would to prefer not to have this project handled in this way. There is only one source, therefore the "author" should either be "Various" or the editor. The only time we would make this a collection is if there were many sources contributing to the whole project. I like the way that the titles of the sections in the MW are set up, that's perfect! But making all the different authors searchable will only skew the search results. I think the way this gets affected is that the software attributes all the sections to each author. So, if we have one author with one work recorded here at LV, the author would be shown as having 106 different results in the search because of this project. (I think that is how that works.) Plus, it is way too much work to have to enter all that data into the database for one person. We are volunteers, we don't need to do more work than is necessary.

Let me know what you would like to do. Then I will decide if I will pick this one up.

Hi Ann,

It's kind of you to consider picking this up.

I think I've been misunderstood about the authors thing - I wasn't intending a collection since it's a single-text work, as you said. I was proposing a project with many authors. That's the same as a normal project but all the authors get added to the author field for the whole project. Only admins can do that after the project has been launched but a person generating a new project can add lots of authors (like I did). Then when it's catalogued, it appears as the first two authors 'et al.'

A good example is here. There are seven authors linked to it in the catalogue (even though only two appear). The sections are not searchable (eg: sections 6 and 7) so they don't clutter the catalog. But the whole project appears (once) when you search for any of the authors (eg: sections 6 and 7).

But now that the authors I added have been deleted, you would have to go in and add them again which would probably be a nuisance. So I'm happy if you just set this up as 'various' and we leave it

OK, I see how you are wanting to do this! I can add all those authors back in, but the file name should stay as Various, just to make life easier for the readers. When I catalog, I automatically "fix" all the sections to catch the tiny errors that are hard to see with so many section. So the author would be credited to Mr. Various anyway.

OK, I will put me as the MC, so everyone can now upload to my folder. Also, the one thing that needs to be done, the file number needs to be three digits since we are going over 100 sections. I will make that change right now.

[pnagami]

Hi Ann and InTheDesert,

Section 1 is ready for PL:

25:00

https://librivox.org/uploads/icequeen/cambridgemedievalhistory2_01_various_128kb.mp3

My best,

Pam

[pnagami]

Hi Ann,

I will rename my file 001 and re-upload.

Pam

[InTheDesert]

OK, I will put me as the MC, so everyone can now upload to my folder. Also, the one thing that needs to be done, the file number needs to be three digits since we are going over 100 sections. I will make that change right now.

Thankyou so much and good catch!

[InTheDesert]

Hi Ann,

Do I need to rename my file 001 then?

Pam

That would be great. Thankyou!

[pnagami]

Hi Ann and InTheDesert,

Here is the file with the right number:

https://librivox.org/uploads/icequeen/cambridgemedievalhistory2_001_various_128kb.mp3

My best,

Pam

[InTheDesert]

Hi Ann and InTheDesert,

Here is the file with the right number:

https://librivox.org/uploads/icequeen/cambridgemedievalhistory2_001_various_128kb.mp3

My best,

Pam

Thankyou!

[icequeen]

Hi Ann,

Do I need to rename my file 001 then?

Pam

That would be great. Thankyou!

Actually, you could have left it the way it was. Like I said above, I fix everything when I catalog, so it would have been fine. The only place that it would have been weird is in my folder, but that one is not that big of a deal anyway. I do this in this way so that I don't have a bunch of files in my folder just from correcting the file name, especially when there is nothing else wrong with it. (I have had people uploading files over and over, just to correct for something small. It is irritating when I find 15 different uploads for 1 file. Yes, I did say 15. I wanted to strangle that person, but I restrained myself!)

Anyhoo, I think we can run on over to Readers Wanted to get this project rolling!

[icequeen]

Now I have been given the right information for how the multiple authors are to be handled. We have added this to our Wiki, which can be found here.

What I will do is add all the authors to the Keywords. You have done as should be done with this situation, which is to have the author's name in the MW. The author wiki links won't be added to the section titles or to Project page, which you don't see but is where all the important information is entered. This is how I have normally handled these projects, I have the latest Great Events by Famous Historians set up this way. You can also add the author's names to the summary, then the readers can see who has contributed to this work.

[InTheDesert]

Now I have been given the right information for how the multiple authors are to be handled. We have added this to our Wiki, which can be found here.

What I will do is add all the authors to the Keywords. You have done as should be done with this situation, which is to have the author's name in the MW. The author wiki links won't be added to the section titles or to Project page, which you don't see but is where all the important information is entered. This is how I have normally handled these projects, I have the latest Great Events by Famous Historians set up this way. You can also add the author's names to the summary, then the readers can see who has contributed to this work.

Affirmative! I have updated the first post to remove any references to the different authors. Ready for Readers Wanted!