English Amiga Board Amiga Lore


Go Back   English Amiga Board > Other Projects > project.TOSEC (amiga only)

 
 
Thread Tools
Old 19 October 2008, 19:42   #1
bippym
Global Moderator

bippym's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Derby, UK
Age: 39
Posts: 8,387
Send a message via Skype™ to bippym
Stringing Flags Together

I know there is probably a good reason for this but why can TOSEC not string flags together that have some detailes duplicated

for example

Ikari Warriors (1988)(Elite) [cr Flashtro][f 680x0 Flashtro][t+12 Flashtro]

has flashtro in common for 3 events, so why can this not be represented as

Ikari Warriors (1988)(Elite)[cr - f 680x0 - t +12 Flashtro]


or something similar?
bippym is offline  
AdSense AdSense  
Old 19 October 2008, 19:58   #2
TCD
Global Moderator

TCD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Germany
Age: 36
Posts: 23,824
Good idea bippy Even if that means a major change, it looks much clearer this way and it shortens the filenames without loosing info. I hope it's not refused because it would be too much work to adopt it...
TCD is offline  
Old 19 October 2008, 20:02   #3
bippym
Global Moderator

bippym's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Derby, UK
Age: 39
Posts: 8,387
Send a message via Skype™ to bippym
even if it was crft +12 flashtro it'd be better!

I think it is pointless duplicating certain info!
bippym is offline  
Old 19 October 2008, 20:08   #4
TCD
Global Moderator

TCD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Germany
Age: 36
Posts: 23,824
Hmm, as the seperation character I would suggest '|' (ASCII code 124). So it would be '[cr|f 680x0|t +12 Flashtro]'.
TCD is offline  
Old 19 October 2008, 20:25   #5
PandMonium
Registered User
PandMonium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Portugal
Posts: 407
in my opinion,

to the human eye:
it looks uglier (at least to me), have to look with more attention if i'm looking for something that appears in the middle of that string, etc.
Imagining [cr7 - f NTSC - m - t +3 - tr en-partial Mr.X - Mr.Y] for a worst example would make me confuse trying to figure out.

Second, it would probably make it harder to identify correctly the things, in other words flags could be confusing since 2 flags could mean different things, having even more forms for the same flags means that they will be harder to found/understand and can be confused with more info etc.
And for extracting info from dats / parsing with tools it will became even harder / more prone to mistakes (this is the more important part in my opinion).

Concluding, yes it would make some sets smaller (you gained 15chars in your example) but i think that we should keep it "as simple as possible, but not simpler"

TNC is already questionable in some parts (as i already told idoru ) so there is no point in making it a bit worst.

Looking for "[tr" word in dats now gives you the translated ones (and some more info flags too i guess), with that you would have to look for "[tr" and "- tr" (and get some more info flags, also group names (ex: "(...)[cr blah - troo]") and other occurrences of " - tr" (in title for example).


But that's just my opinion


EDIT:
Quote:
Originally Posted by bippym View Post
even if it was crft +12 flashtro it'd be better!
I think it is pointless duplicating certain info!
that creates problems and would reduce the cases where it could be used, like [cr2], [f PAL], [m bootblock], [t +12], [tr pt]...
how would it compress? [cr2fmttr PAL bootblock +12 pt flashtro]? how would one know if that is a more info or not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheCyberDruid View Post
Hmm, as the seperation character I would suggest '|' (ASCII code 124). So it would be '[cr|f 680x0|t +12 Flashtro]'.
The problem with your suggestion is that "|" is not a valid char, you can test it trying to rename any of your files with it

Last edited by PandMonium; 19 October 2008 at 20:35.
PandMonium is offline  
Old 19 October 2008, 20:53   #6
TKaos
Registered User
TKaos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Bochum / Germany
Age: 28
Posts: 36
Send a message via ICQ to TKaos
Sorry but I don't like the idea, for me it looks too confusing.
It will shorten the name but then again you can't search for specific files in folders, not possible to search for [cr PDX] for example since it might be [cr - t PDX] then.

Also what would happen if we had something like [cr PDX][f TRSi][t +10 PDX]
would it become [cr - t +10 PDX][f TRSi] ?
That would break the rule of flag order which is:
[cr][f][h][m][p][t][tr][o][u][v][b][a][!]

The other idea about writing "crft +x Flashtro" isn't really nice too, it's too much info in such small space which can be easily overlook, I prefer having it the way it is now, even if it makes some filenames big but it's easier to find the info like that.
TKaos is offline  
Old 19 October 2008, 20:59   #7
[idoru]
Registered User
[idoru]'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 246
i don't like it either
[idoru] is offline  
Old 04 November 2008, 23:53   #8
DH
Global Moderator

DH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: UK
Age: 47
Posts: 3,744
The whole point of making TOSEC consistent is that for all those people out there using the file for other programs would have an enormous headache if anything was to change. As I am working on the TOSEC Dat file with Excel this would end up being disastrous as I require the file to stay exactly the same for import.

If the file were to change, the extraction formula's would cease to work properly from the imported TOSEC Dat file, thus rendering the hard work I have done to useless.

I for one, request the format of the TOSEC Dat File to stay the same. If these were to change, and were to change on a regular basis, no one would ever be able to settle down to a consistent file format and would, probably, give up entirely using the TOSEC file, thus no one to help to update, rename or correct any parts of the file.

As the old saying goes, 'why fix something that isn't broken' it works, so lets leave it alone
DH is offline  
Old 05 November 2008, 00:42   #9
Marcuz
Wurk???

Marcuz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: .
Age: 38
Posts: 4,952
Send a message via MSN to Marcuz
me too i don't like it. and Bippym should be banned for having proposed that.

we are not machines! ban Bippym!
Marcuz is offline  
AdSense AdSense  
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Country Flags Idea Paul project.EAB 7 25 February 2003 02:32

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 15:46.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Page generated in 0.14903 seconds with 11 queries