Log inRegister an accountBrowse CSDbHelp & documentationFacts & StatisticsThe forumsAvailable RSS-feeds on CSDbSupport CSDb Commodore 64 Scene Database
 Welcome to our latest new user danikAdmiral ! (Registered 2024-12-17) You are not logged in - nap
CSDb User Forums


Forums > CSDb Feedback > Description field (at least for tools)
2016-02-18 16:05
ChristopherJam

Registered: Aug 2004
Posts: 1409
Description field (at least for tools)

As per Stormfront's remarks on Bitfire V0.5

Quoting St0rmfr0nt

I really hate when people publish their or someone else's tools without mentioning what the tool is for. Even when it is just an update of an existing "other platform tool" the users have to search in the database for the usage? That's not how it should be treated here.

..(eg) "Bitfire is a fixed interleave loadersystem with depacker, a basic framework and an image writing tool"


Must admit, it would be nice to have somewhere other than Production Notes on NuCrunch 0.1 to say it's no more and no less than a crunch/decrunch codec at present, rather than have people click through to full docs just to find out whether it was something they can actually use at present. I also have NFI what Regenerator Booster V1.1 actually does.

So.. perhaps a one or two line description field would be useful?
2016-02-18 16:50
iAN CooG

Registered: May 2002
Posts: 3191
If people don't give a fuck to describe their productions in the existing production/summary/comment fields, another field would be useless aswell.
2016-02-18 17:37
ChristopherJam

Registered: Aug 2004
Posts: 1409
Production requires a second click to view, and comment is pushed off the bottom once other people join.

I see that someone's placed a description in the AKA field of Bitfire since I started this topic, mind. Is that a convention that I (among others) have been missing?
2016-02-18 19:34
Oswald

Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5094
summary should be used, and ALL type of comments should be displayed on the same page. horrible horrible horrible design decision to click around to read all.
2016-02-18 19:44
Zyron

Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 2381
The Aka field should _never_ be used to describe the release.
2016-02-18 20:00
TheRyk

Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 2240
If an author or anyone else WANTS to provide info, there's "Summaries". BTW "requires 2nd click" is no argument against existing 5 fields. If a user WANTS more info, he WILL have to look for it and click (or stay stupid and does not deserve any better).

PS: And what Zyron says! AKA is for alternative production title/release name or misspelled variants found on disks
RefreshSubscribe to this thread:

You need to be logged in to post in the forum.

Search the forum:
Search   for   in  
All times are CET.
Search CSDb
Advanced
Users Online
Fred/Channel 4
Darkflight
Exploding Fi../Techn..
Jazzcat/Onslaught
JLD/Finnish Gold
visionvortex
Freddie
Guests online: 77
Top Demos
1 Next Level  (9.7)
2 13:37  (9.7)
3 Mojo  (9.6)
4 Coma Light 13  (9.6)
5 Edge of Disgrace  (9.6)
6 What Is The Matrix 2  (9.6)
7 The Demo Coder  (9.6)
8 Uncensored  (9.6)
9 Comaland 100%  (9.6)
10 Wonderland XIV  (9.6)
Top onefile Demos
1 Layers  (9.6)
2 Party Elk 2  (9.6)
3 Cubic Dream  (9.6)
4 Copper Booze  (9.6)
5 No Listen  (9.6)
6 Rainbow Connection  (9.5)
7 Dawnfall V1.1  (9.5)
8 Onscreen 5k  (9.5)
9 Morph  (9.5)
10 Libertongo  (9.5)
Top Groups
1 Performers  (9.3)
2 Booze Design  (9.3)
3 Oxyron  (9.3)
4 Triad  (9.3)
5 Censor Design  (9.3)
Top NTSC-Fixers
1 Pudwerx  (10)
2 Booze  (9.7)
3 Stormbringer  (9.7)
4 Fungus  (9.6)
5 Grim Reaper  (9.3)

Home - Disclaimer
Copyright © No Name 2001-2024
Page generated in: 0.185 sec.