|
Making a list of what is missing is obviously something that can be done outside of both SPS and TOSEC, and cross-referenced to their collections.
TOSEC does have metadata, and it is being refreshed from time to time — it's just that the starting point was not optimal. TOSEC seems to have originated as a way to keep track of console dumps, where the number of altered images, cracks and variations is much, much smaller than on computers with rewritable media. The remaining Amiga maintainers seem to acknowledge this and aren't as interested in cataloguing every dump of Workbench 1.3 with an altered file date.
Nevertheless, due to the nature of Amiga dumps, a project like TOSEC is necessary simply so that someone interested in preserving only originals or known working copies has a way to tell bad and good dumps apart; it's just that most people don't realise that that's what it's for.
MrDolby, for instance, has done a lot of work to isolate original dumps of Workbench disks, which was previously impossible to tell apart in TOSEC because verified dumps wasn't a priority when the project started out.
But if TOSEC/Amiga is lacking in manpower, it needs to reach out to the community to recruit more people. And yes, more metadata is necessary if veracity is a goal.
|