Just A Minute

 
<<<<   3316   >>>>

Re: What Info Do You Want In JAM Labels?

Messages in this topic: 7 View All
berlinirvingJun 24, 2009
 

 
I've read several suggestions here since I first asked my question about the preferred order and contents about the JAM labeling. Thank you to everyone who has contributed suggestions; they are appreciated by me.

People have suggested differing preferences and many are mutually exclusive, and show that different people want different things in a labeling system. Obviously I can use only one system and can't accommodate everyone's wishes. Right now this seems the best format to me:

Just A Minute #001(s01e01; 1967-12-22)Excuses for Being Late.mp3

This is because:
1. Dean's numbering system is useful to many of us, even if it's not consistent with OTR practice;
2. Series, episode and date info is otherwise consistent with OTR practice
3. I've used brackets to make a visual identification easier to do;
4. Info about who the speakers are is not included to keep the appearance less cluttered, but will be included in the tags. I realize that this doesn't answer every desire, but I don't believe that any system could.

The sole piece of info I think I should add is some sort of notation that would indicate whether I have recorded the file myself, so that anyone can know that it's different from the ones I have collected from other people. No-one would like to download a file from me only to find it's the same as what they already have.

If anyone sees any problem with this plan, or has any better suggestions, please let me know. I'll start the process of preparing my collection for posting into Mediafire soon.

dal.

--- In just-a-minute@..., "Clitheroe Kid" <clitheroekid@...> 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.
>
> Standard OTR cataloguing uses the following naming convention:-
> [Series Title] - [Series & Episode Number] [Date] - [Episode
> description].mp3
>
> Example:-
> Just A Minute - s01e01 1967-12-22 - Excuses for Being Late.mp3
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "George Still" <george@...>
> To: <just-a-minute@...>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 10:56 PM
> Subject: RE: [just-a-minute] What Info Do You Want In JAM Labels?
>
>
> > I always liked to put the date first topic in. It's a clear way of
> > identifying the shows.
> >
> > I've changed the JAM to Just a Minute and back again.
> >
> > Things like the season & episode number, speakers and other info (with the
> > artist either JAM or BBC) all can go in the IP3 data.
> >
> >
> >
> > As for the database, I keep meaning to do it, with data from all the
> topics,
> > speakers, final positions together, but I've never got the time. It gets
> > very frustrating.
> >
> >
> >
> > From: just-a-minute@... [mailto:just-a-minute@...]
> > On Behalf Of Dean Bedford
> > Sent: 08 June 2009 09:45
> > To: just-a-minute@...
> > Subject: Re: [just-a-minute] What Info Do You Want In JAM Labels?
> >
> >
> >
> > On Monday, June 8, 2009, at 12:49 PM, nylon net wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Personally, I like the first-topic filenaming. The naming scheme is easier
> > to identify individual eps than a solitary code number (but include the ep
> > number by all means).
> >
> > I'm not too interested in the cast because I rarely need to find all eps
> > featuring a particular person. Perhaps you might need it for your academic
> > JAM work...
> >
> > Has anyone gone to the bother of producing a database or spreadsheet of
> JAM
> > eps for power users?
> >
> > Mark
> >
> >
> > The firstv subjects aren't all unique though and once you've identified
> the
> > show by number the first subject doesn't really provide any useful
> > information. On the other hand if you are looking through a pile of shows
> > and think "hmmmm, I fancy a bit of Peter Jones... preferably with Derek
> and
> > Paul..."
> >
> > but as I say - thats just me.
> >
> >
>

 
<<<<   3316   >>>>

Back to the Top