Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
Well hell! :) You from Texas, too? :) Thanks. Not much to it. Font's can be fixed, etc. Didn't spend much time there. Right now, the only maintenance that's designed into it, is the "validating" of links when they are added. It would be up to Kim re: keeping it that way or not. I know that with the LD File Library, we tied a login system into the LD list, so that you can only upload if you are a list subscriber. That kind of functionality isn't in this system, and it would be significant work to add it. There are a couple of options: - let links go in automatically - Kim might not like this because any old schmo could come along and add a link - use the current validation system - simple and easy to use - login as an admin, and you need one click per link to validate them - tie the privilege of adding a link to LD list membership - like I said, a good piece of work would have to be done. Even then, we'd still have to decide on auto link validation or having people manually validate - in all cases, it might make sense for Kim to delegate admin privileges to a trusted few, so that those folks can easily share the load of occasionally validating links and/or cleaning up any bogus entries Agreed - next step is to hear what Kim thinks. Maybe we should take this part of the discussion off-list? But - I think one good round of LD list members looking at these interfaces and commenting could be done in parallel with that discussion. So - what say ye, o brethren of the loop? Ideas on categorization, the standard values for "genre" (I remember a recently posted list, that Matthias pointed out was lacking?), loopers, instruments, compositional approach, etc.? Any other characteristics to use? Any desire to drop the live vs. pre-recorded designation? The compositional approach? Let's hear it :) Doug ----- Original Message ----- From: "Greg Kucharo" <telecaster@mac.com> To: <Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com> Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2003 12:11 PM Subject: Re: Narrowing the field (Re: Currently available looper music webpage) > Well hell! This looks great Doug. I'd say we might have a winner > here. However, it too still feels a bit too self maintaining ala the > Wiki and current profiles. I dunno, it's probably just me. I'm sure it > could be modified to be less, er, self and more maintain. > > Next topic should be, how would Kim feel about putting this on the LD > website so it's official. I'll be happy to help keep the thing running > or otherwise wack it into shape. > > One small problem, the fonts looks really bad on the Safari browser. > > > On Sunday, August 31, 2003, at 10:00 AM, Doug Cox wrote: > > > Greg & Bernhard, > > > > Not trying to create a competition or anything! :) I had already done > > this > > last night, and written most of this email, but was zonked so I > > decided to > > send it out today. Obviously, I'm going ahead with that plan, but I > > really > > don't want to create a confusing situation. Maybe everyone can have a > > look > > and make comments, and we can decide where to go from there? > > > > Everyone, > > > > I threw together a quick demo of the idea I had re: LD artist > > listings. It > > also seems to lend itself to individual audio file links, and to CD > > reviews, > > so I also integrated that idea into the demo. > > > > The link: http://www.mrscox.com/sslinks/links.php The root of this > > is my > > wife's website (she's an 8th grade english teacher). Please don't > > email her > > questions about diagramming a sentence or anything. :) > > > > The basic idea: > > Treat artist listings (and individual track links, and CD reviews) > > similar > > to old-school Yahoo listings. There is a primary set of > > characteristics > > that define the *browsable* heirarchy, but each listing also has > > specific > > fields for other characteristics, so that advanced *searching* can be > > done. > > This supports the idea that a few folks have mentioned, and that Andre > > proposed a list for - being able to build specific queries across these > > characteristics to find the artists, audio files, or cd reviews. > > > > In the demo, the pre-defined categories are "media" related - i.e., > > Artist > > Sites, Audio Files, CD Reviews, etc. Artist Sites *could* be > > sub-divided > > into sections for browsability. Something concrete would be good - > > like > > "home region of the world". > > > > Each listing/link then has a description and a set of characteristics. > > For > > demo purposes, I just kinda translated Andre's list: Desc, Genre/Style, > > Instruments, Looper, Reference Artist, Live vs. Studio approach, > > Compositional Approach, Year Released. These characteristics could be > > an > > endlessly debateable topic, so I'd suggest we not linger on it too > > long, and > > instead provide an interface like this: > > > > - for each characteristic, have the user choose a certain number of > > predefined values (3 Genre/Styles, for instance), and then also > > include a > > small freeform text area for them to add their own words. So, I could > > choose "Ambient", "Solo Guitar", "Electronica" and then type > > "rhythmic, out > > of tune, boring" in the freeform area. Those would all be concatenated > > together when someone does a search on "Genre/Style". > > > > Again, debating which list of Genre/Styles (or Live vs. Studio > > descriptions, > > or - heaven forbid! - Compositional Approaches) to use doesn't sound > > like > > fun. Maybe someone could just put a reasonable proposal on the table > > for > > each, and we go with that? > > > > You'll see that I mocked up the search page to handle all of these > > characteristics, but the gears aren't installed behind it to make it > > really > > work. :) Just giving a feel for how that interface might look. > > > > Would love to hear comments! > > > > Added today: Greg - if this looks like a way you'd like to go as well, > > let > > me know, and we could split up the work in getting it done. I suspect > > that > > with quick decisions on the various characteristics, we could get this > > up > > before the end of this week. The custom coding to be done is very > > simple. > > > > Doug > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Bernhard Wagner" <loopdelightml@nosuch.biz> > > To: <Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com> > > Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2003 9:55 AM > > Subject: RE: Narrowing the field (Re: Currently available looper music > > webpage) > > > > > >> I set up a prototype > >> > >> http://www.xmlizer.biz/cgi-bin/LoopersDelightReviews/kwiki.cgi > >> > >> Bernhard > >> > > >