Author Topic: About TOSEC Naming Convention 2015-03-23.pdf  (Read 7884 times)

Offline Crashdisk

  • TOSEC Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 254
Re: About TOSEC Naming Convention 2015-03-23.pdf
« Reply #15 on: July 01, 2015, 09:07:10 PM »
Yes, it's a direct quote, I had not even seen ^^

Offline PandMonium

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1323
Re: About TOSEC Naming Convention 2015-03-23.pdf
« Reply #16 on: July 01, 2015, 09:26:59 PM »
I'm sure we can blame Cassiel for that! :D

Offline Cassiel

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1561
    • Email
Re: About TOSEC Naming Convention 2015-03-23.pdf
« Reply #17 on: July 02, 2015, 12:30:15 PM »
What I do?!  :)

Offline Crashdisk

  • TOSEC Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 254
Re: About TOSEC Naming Convention 2015-03-23.pdf
« Reply #18 on: July 02, 2015, 01:44:41 PM »
Bigger is, less it shows ;-)

Offline SG-1 Charpy

  • TOSEC Member
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 16
    • Email
Re: About TOSEC Naming Convention 2015-03-23.pdf
« Reply #19 on: March 20, 2016, 01:07:13 PM »
 ;D hi  i have just notice some errors in the TOSEC Naming Convention 2015-03-23.pdf downloaded from the site.

Hacked - [h]
The original software has been deliberately hacked/altered in some way, such as adding an intro or changing in game sprites or text.
The variants are:
[h] - Hacked
TOSEC Naming Convention 01-01-2015
20
[f Hack] – Description of hack
[f Hacker] – Hacked by (group or person)
[f Hack Hacker] – Description of hack, followed by hacker (group or person)

all the date in the doc are bad.
For the hacker flag it's the same in the TOSEC Naming Convention web version
http://www.tosecdev.org/tosec-naming-convention
 ^-^

Offline PandMonium

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1323
Re: About TOSEC Naming Convention 2015-03-23.pdf
« Reply #20 on: April 14, 2016, 12:25:18 AM »
Thanks! Fixed both pages (pdf+html). Will also do a few updates to the site's software.

Offline Kodoichi

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 153
  • ❤️ 💾 🕹
Re: About TOSEC Naming Convention 2015-03-23.pdf
« Reply #21 on: May 18, 2017, 07:59:14 AM »
I found some [FD installed] in the Amiga games database and couldn't find any explanation what it is. I guess it's FixDisk, a tool to fix disk errors?

Offline Crashdisk

  • TOSEC Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 254
Re: About TOSEC Naming Convention 2015-03-23.pdf
« Reply #22 on: May 18, 2017, 04:08:16 PM »
This is a disk obtained by an installation process. Most of the time, it reduces the number of disks on the original distribution and it also allows to propose an installation on hard disk

Offline Kodoichi

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 153
  • ❤️ 💾 🕹
Re: About TOSEC Naming Convention 2015-03-23.pdf
« Reply #23 on: May 18, 2017, 05:46:48 PM »
Ah, I see. Lots of coverdisks used that method.

But should these disks even be listed in Tosec then, if they have an original, parent installer disk (unless they had a cracktro and other stuff added)? Basically they're just contributing to more [a]lternatives? On the other hand I understand that it's easier for us to play these games right away without creating the disks first.

Offline Kodoichi

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 153
  • ❤️ 💾 🕹
Re: About TOSEC Naming Convention 2015-03-23.pdf
« Reply #24 on: November 06, 2017, 08:42:30 AM »
I'm confused about the (PD) flag in the Amiga games public domain ADF database. It either makes no sense to me to flag the entries with (PD), as we already know from the database title, or it makes sense to differ between shareware and full public domain dedication. But then, some entries have a (PD) flag, others don't. Does that mean it's not clear what copyright status the latter have?

Offline Kodoichi

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 153
  • ❤️ 💾 🕹
Re: About TOSEC Naming Convention 2015-03-23.pdf
« Reply #25 on: February 07, 2018, 09:30:32 PM »
In the Amiga games database I came across the flags [b dump], [b baddump] and even [a baddump]. Do they all have the same meaning, is there a difference or are they wrongly flagged?

Edit: I also found some [m baddump].
« Last Edit: February 08, 2018, 07:11:32 AM by Kodoichi »

Offline Kodoichi

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 153
  • ❤️ 💾 🕹
Re: About TOSEC Naming Convention 2015-03-23.pdf
« Reply #26 on: October 13, 2021, 10:25:40 AM »
I think my brain finally computed the difference between [b dump] and [m baddump]:
[b dump] is a faulty disk image.
[m baddump] means someone took that already faulty image and modified something on it. So basically it's an [a]lternative copy of the [b dump]. And read correctly, it would be [m bad dump] with a space inbetween?

All [b baddump] seem to have been cleaned/corrected to [m baddump], I still see a few [a baddump] though. Shouldn't they be [b2 dump]?

Another flag I now see is [a rebuilt]. What was rebuilt and who did that? Did someone take an alternative version of a disk image and reverted it back to match the original image?

Offline Crashdisk

  • TOSEC Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 254
Re: About TOSEC Naming Convention 2015-03-23.pdf
« Reply #27 on: October 13, 2021, 07:26:59 PM »
Hi Kodoichi,

for [b dump], it is mainly used to designate a defective NoDOS disk.
for [m baddump], it also refers to a defective NoDOS disk but with the particularity that no useful data is affected. So the disk is normally 100% functional.
for [a rebuilt], it is a disk whose content is the same (or almost) as other disks considered close to the original distribution.The difference is that the files have been placed in a blank disk (more or less fresh). This happens, for example, when reproducing a disk from an archive :
https://aminet.net/package/game/demo/ApexGolf

I hope it will be clearer now ;)