Author Topic: Suggested addition to the naming convention  (Read 2753 times)

Offline Neon Vincent

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Suggested addition to the naming convention
« on: August 15, 2012, 05:23:18 AM »
I propose that a book or magazine scan should tell, in the filename, whether it's "cover to cover" or if the ads have been excluded.  Just one example I found in the newsgroup:
Computer Shopper - Issue 341 Volume 28 Number 08 (2008-08)(SX Media Labs)(US).zip
The last numbered page in this pdf is 102, but there are only 65 pages scanned.  Also, that last page has an arrow that apparently points across to page 103, which is not included.  Did the scanner make a call that the next page, although not an ad, just wasn't important enough to include?  Or is the arrow just a reference to the URL printed within it?  How can we tell?

I suggest TOSEC adopt the naming convention that we have used in the comic book scanning world for ten years: (c2c) or (noads).  I, for one, am a completist, and I would only be interested in c2c scans.  How cool would all those old issues of Run and Ahoy! be without the ads?  Might not today's ads be worth reviewing ten years from now?  Is TOSEC not a *completion* project?

I'm not saying TOSEC should only accept c2c scans, just that whether a scan is c2c or has no ads should be clearly identified in the namimg convention.



Offline Neon Vincent

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: Suggested addition to the naming convention
« Reply #1 on: September 18, 2012, 04:09:55 AM »
A whole month and not a word of reply?  Good, bad, go to hell?

Offline PandMonium

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1303
Re: Suggested addition to the naming convention
« Reply #2 on: September 18, 2012, 10:35:16 AM »
Sorry Neon Vincent, somehow i forgot about your original post. I'm not involved in PIX and have no knowledge about scans has you do. The best answer would be by Aral, since he is the one producing all that.

Still, i agree with you, if there are different types of scans there should be a way to differentiate them, although i don't think create a specific new flag is needed. We could simply use the two keywords you gave "c2c" and "noads" and use them as needed in more info fields or even at a datfile name (category) level, if a collection is datted in both formats. Again, i'm not exactly informed and there might be something i missed but indeed, it is probably  information that should be available.

Offline Maddog

  • TOSEC Member
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 115
Re: Suggested addition to the naming convention
« Reply #3 on: September 18, 2012, 09:45:53 PM »
Yes, shouldn't be a bad addition.
c2c scans should always be the target, noads variants just aren't the same.

Offline Neon Vincent

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: Suggested addition to the naming convention
« Reply #4 on: September 18, 2012, 09:52:35 PM »
Please look hard at including this info in the filename. I want to know before I ever download it, and perhaps I won't be using dats to download it.  I still don't have the hang of dats.  Everything I have so far came from the tosec newsgroup.