Just A Minute

 
<<<<   3242   >>>>

Re: What Info Do You Want In JAM Labels?

Messages in this topic: 7 View All
lapsedcatJun 12, 2009
 

 
Hm.

Trivial little disagreements like this have a worrying tendency to snowball out of control. After all, the First World War actually began after the Kaiser and George V fell out over whether the 't' in 'duvet' is silent or not (the King insisted it rhymed with "move it").

Think on chaps.

--- In just-a-minute@..., Dean Bedford <dbedford@...> wrote:
>
> I suggest you go back and have a look at my two posts before yours in
> the thread. At no point did I say ONLY use the sequential number.
>
> In fact I didn't specify which numbering system it should be - but I had
> in mind the numbers I use on the site ie 1/1/1. Therefore it would be
> possible to match this with the OTR people you know - and also with a
> lot of collectors I know who are using the sequential numbering. Indeed
> many in this group use it.
>
> Perhaps we can now leave this to anyone else to chime in on. Your
> preferences are clear, understood and respected.
>
>
> On Friday, June 12, 2009, at 02:48 PM, Clitheroe Kid wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > You quoted selectively from my e-mail.
> >
> > As my complete e-mail made clear, I am in favour of the standard OTR
> > naming
> > system whereby the file name includes the series number, the episode
> > number,
> > and the broadcast date.
> >
> > Although the system used on your website is not confusing, because it
> > gives
> > all that information (and, in addition, a sequential number), it would
> > be
> > confusing to name a file by giving only its sequential number (between
> > 1 and
> > infinity) because all OTR websites and collectors use date, series and
> > episode number to identify programmes.
> >
> > For example:
> > Just A Minute - s01e01 1967-12-22 - Excuses for Being Late.mp3
> >
> > It would be impossible to match your sequential numbering against an OTR
> > collection on another website, because OTR collectors do not quote
> > sequential numbers to identify files.
> >
> > Thus if I say I am looking for episode number 182 or 259, an OTR
> > webmaster
> > will not know which episode I am trying to find. I would have to tell
> > him,
> > for example, I wanted series 1 episode 1 broadcast on 22 December 1967.
> >
> > It's entirely up to you how you organise JAM labels. Someone asked what
> > information needed to be included, and I am letting you know what would
> > be
> > most helpful when comparing files with those on other OTR websites.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Dean Bedford" <dbedford@...>
> > To: <just-a-minute@...>
> > Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 7:52 PM
> > Subject: Re: [just-a-minute] What Info Do You Want In JAM Labels?
> >
> > >
> > > On Thursday, June 11, 2009, at 11:30 PM, Clitheroe Kid wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > As an Old Time Radio collector, the essential items of information I
> > > > need
> > > > are the series number, episode number, and date. Most old-time radio
> > > > collections on the internet are catalogued that way.
> > > >
> > > > Old Time Radio collectors do not use Dean's system of numbering:
> > from 1
> > > > to
> > > > infinity, beginning with s01e01 as number 1. That results in
> > confusion.
> > > > You
> > > > can't match an episode against the OTR collections and lists
> > available
> > > > on-line if all you know is it's episode number 182 or 259.
> > >
> > > You're the first person in my 10 years of running the list that has
> > > called my lists confusing.
> > >
> > > And you're incorrect too because if you look at the site it actually
> > has
> > > both the numbers within each season AND the overall number. That's "my
> > > system" though the phrase gives me too much credit.
> > >
> > > I know many old time radio collectors - I am one myself. People
> > compile
> > > their own lists in their own way but I've until today had no-one call
> > > the very clear and detailed information I have provided confusing.
> > >
> >
> >
>

 
<<<<   3242   >>>>

Back to the Top