Search problem
Re: Search problem
We will certainly need a choice [mention]Rorthron[/mention], because what's right for you may not be for others. Searching is a very personal thing. It's trying to cover all bases and not restrict the search too much.
I'm sure people are paid huge amounts to work this stuff out!
I'm sure people are paid huge amounts to work this stuff out!
Re: Search problem
Agreed [mention]Einar Saukas[/mention]. I can't start to imagine the maintenance on that sort of size database.
- Einar Saukas
- Bugaboo
- Posts: 3070
- Joined: Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:48 pm
Re: Search problem
Authors could also have this kind of choice.
Or perhaps a single flag to choose between "broad search mode" and "strict search mode"? This way you don't have to overload the search interface with too many options.
Or perhaps a single flag to choose between "broad search mode" and "strict search mode"? This way you don't have to overload the search interface with too many options.
Re: Search problem
I wish.
The narrow/strict option is certainly possible, but another solution might be to "do a Google" and instead weight the order of results somewhat. Such that everything comes out but things directly released by GrandSlam all come first and then other related publishers follow. That tends to cover both bases since you can easily crop the results of you are only interested in specifics.
Re: Search problem
There are Bug Byte collectors who would disagree with that - they don't consider anything published by Argus or Grandslam as a "proper" Bug Byte release. It's the same for Quicksilva, Imagine etc.
You can't make this kind a blanket assumption, and it's not a "theory" either! Like Imagine, Bug Byte was a dead company whose assets were sold by the liquidators. This is a completely different situation to Quicksilva, who were bought by Argus Press as a going concern. In any case, we know that Matthew Smith took Manic Miner to Software Projects, and Bug Byte never actually owned it. In most cases, publishers don't buy the copyright - they licence it for a period of time. If you buy another publisher, you don't automatically get to own everything they ever released.Rorthron wrote: ↑Thu May 28, 2020 10:20 pm It could in theory be incorrect to say a Bug-Byte title is a Grandslam title. But in practice it should make little difference. It is likely Grandslam acquired the rights to Bug-Byte's back catalogue, and the same probably applies for other acquired publishers.
Re: Search problem
Hi [mention]StooB[/mention], if you are happy to document some examples as to how your proposed structure may look we can certainly review it. Also how you envisage the pages and searching would look. Also is all the required information available somewhere?
The documentation for ZXDB is here.
https://github.com/zxdb/ZXDB/blob/master/README.md
Please feel free to ask any questions about the structure and table links. Sorry I don't know if you are up with database design?
Many thanks.
The documentation for ZXDB is here.
https://github.com/zxdb/ZXDB/blob/master/README.md
Please feel free to ask any questions about the structure and table links. Sorry I don't know if you are up with database design?
Many thanks.
Re: Search problem
There may well be, but that is irrelevant to the point I made. Some users might find it useful to observe the distinction you describe, but they would struggle to show that there isn't an unambiguous definition of Bug-Byte that includes all titles sold under the Bug-Byte label. Your prior contention was that a time-based definition of a publisher was the only possible definition. I am pointing out that there are other valid definitions.
Actually, I did make that assumption, just as you make the assumption that "in most cases, publishers don't buy the copyright". The point is that unless we can identify the exact contractual arrangements for every single game in ZXDB, we have no choice but to make assumptions. It would be great if we had a complete and accurate contractual history for every title, but it is in practice unworkable to get that, so all we have are assumptions. If you have a better set of assumptions, I'd be interested to hear them, but based in the discussion so far, the current assumptions don't seem to me unreasonable, and no-one has suggested a workable alternative.StooB wrote: ↑Fri May 29, 2020 2:21 pmYou can't make this kind a blanket assumption, and it's not a "theory" either! Like Imagine, Bug Byte was a dead company whose assets were sold by the liquidators. This is a completely different situation to Quicksilva, who were bought by Argus Press as a going concern. In any case, we know that Matthew Smith took Manic Miner to Software Projects, and Bug Byte never actually owned it. In most cases, publishers don't buy the copyright - they licence it for a period of time. If you buy another publisher, you don't automatically get to own everything they ever released.Rorthron wrote: ↑Thu May 28, 2020 10:20 pm It could in theory be incorrect to say a Bug-Byte title is a Grandslam title. But in practice it should make little difference. It is likely Grandslam acquired the rights to Bug-Byte's back catalogue, and the same probably applies for other acquired publishers.
Re: Search problem
Why is there "no choice but to make assumptions"? The database should stick to the actual facts and nothing else. If Manic Miner appears in a list of titles published by Grandslam - which we know is 100% incorrect - then that does seem "unreasonable" to me! What does it say about the credibility of the data if it can't get the details of one of the most famous games on the platform right?Rorthron wrote: ↑Fri May 29, 2020 5:48 pm The point is that unless we can identify the exact contractual arrangements for every single game in ZXDB, we have no choice but to make assumptions. It would be great if we had a complete and accurate contractual history for every title, but it is in practice unworkable to get that, so all we have are assumptions. If you have a better set of assumptions, I'd be interested to hear them, but based in the discussion so far, the current assumptions don't seem to me unreasonable, and no-one has suggested a workable alternative.
Re: Search problem
The offer is still there to contribute [mention]StooB[/mention].
We want to ensure we make the right choices before investing time in them.
We want to ensure we make the right choices before investing time in them.
Re: Search problem
I think maybe this needs clarification. Let us be clear that the search results and page detail does say Bug-Byte. The discussion here is about the search results being date sensitive and if to include titles where the company has subsequently been adsorbed at said date. If people want huge changes like this they need to step up and contribute.StooB wrote: ↑Fri May 29, 2020 6:04 pm If Manic Miner appears in a list of titles published by Grandslam - which we know is 100% incorrect - then that does seem "unreasonable" to me! What does it say about the credibility of the data if it can't get the details of one of the most famous games on the platform right?
Re: Search problem
Because we don't have the complete contractual history of every Spectrum game.
Manic Miner is a great illustration of the problem. Not only is it one of the most famous Spectrum games, it is also one of the very few whose contractual arrangements have been openly discussed. Yet we actually know very little about its contractual arrangements. Who currently owns or has distribution rights to Manic Miner? I think Steve Wilcox will claim he does, but I doubt he could back it up. Even for the period where we do have information on Manic Miner, we have little more than the word of a young Matthew Smith, who seems not exactly to have been on top of these things.StooB wrote: ↑Fri May 29, 2020 6:04 pm The database should stick to the actual facts and nothing else. If Manic Miner appears in a list of titles published by Grandslam - which we know is 100% incorrect - then that does seem "unreasonable" to me! What does it say about the credibility of the data if it can't get the details of one of the most famous games on the platform right?
In any case, this is one of the most clear-cut cases. What do we know about the contractual arrangements for Program Pack 4?
If you are able to establish all of this information reliably for every Spectrum title, then great, but it seems an impossible ask to me.
Re: Search problem
The advanced search section on the home page now includes an option to specify results strictness. The default behaviour is to include everything, but choose 'strict search' from the pull-down menu and that is what you should get:
I'm aware that the search area on desktop layout needs a bit of design work after adding this extra filter.
I'm aware that the search area on desktop layout needs a bit of design work after adding this extra filter.
Re: Search problem
Seems to work nicely. Thanks!