What order to list omnibus editions within series lists?

DiskuteraCommon Knowledge, WikiThing, HelpThing

Bara medlemmar i LibraryThing kan skriva.

What order to list omnibus editions within series lists?

Denna diskussion är för närvarande "vilande"—det sista inlägget är mer än 90 dagar gammalt. Du kan återstarta det genom att svara på inlägget.

1humouress
Redigerat: aug 17, 2019, 10:42 am

Is there a standard on LT for ordering omnibus editions in series lists? While I appreciate that others might use them differently or for different purposes, I use the series lists (especially when I'm in bookshops and fiddling with the internet browser on my mobile phone) for checking which books I haven't got yet.

For instance, my particular bugbear is the Vorkosigan series where the publishers have seen fit to publish various omnibus editions with different combinations of some of the same books or omnibus with books that skip (the chronological) order. Currently, the omnibus are at the end but I would find it more helpful if they appeared in the list after the (last of the) books contained in them. For instance, I would like to see Cordelia's Honour, which contains books 2 and 3 after book 3 in the list or Vorkosigan's Game, which contains books 5 and 8, after book 8.

I wanted to check if there is an LT policy on how they should be ordered or if I can change the order.

2MarthaJeanne
aug 17, 2019, 11:13 am

Personally, I find the current practice of having them all at the end best. If you change the order, others are likely to change the order back.

3gilroy
Redigerat: aug 17, 2019, 11:45 am

They go at the end. Now they should be in order of what books are within the omnibus, so one holding books 2 and 3 should be before one containing books 5 and 8 but they both belong at the end of the list.

ETA: looking at what you list, there's also the problem of publication order versus chronological order. Meaning two different series. With differing orders, but omnibi are at the end in every case.

4humouress
aug 17, 2019, 11:57 am

*sigh* Okay, I'll leave it as is.

Thanks for the replies.

5AnnieMod
aug 17, 2019, 1:02 pm

I prefer omnibuses at the end as well - that way you do not have 10 different books between 4 and 5 (because of differently sized omnibuses and what’s not).

Let the series get ordered sequentially, then have all kinds of collected editions and omnibuses and so on.

6elenchus
aug 17, 2019, 3:35 pm

Am I right in thinking humouress could create a new series, with a distinct name, and order it how she likes -- and then link that to the existing series? In much the same way that many sets of books have both a chronological and publication order named series in LT. Or is that frowned upon?

7gilroy
aug 17, 2019, 5:06 pm

>6 elenchus: Frowned upon. Though a series of just omnibi might work.

8AnnieMod
Redigerat: aug 18, 2019, 4:12 am

>6 elenchus: If everyone starts creating their series any way they want, the CK field will get unmanageable - both for editing and for being shown as part of a catalog. So even though it is possible, chances are that someone will just delete the series at some point.

9Stevil2001
aug 18, 2019, 8:42 pm

I think mixed-in omnibi are okay when the omnibusing is pretty straightforward. Like
- book 1
- book 2
- book 3
- omnibus 1-3
- book 4
- book 5
- book 6
- omnibus 4-6

But when there's an omnibus 1-2, an omnibus 1-3, an omnibus 2-4, an omnibus 4-6, an omnibus 5-6, and in a fit of publisher pique, an omnibus 1-3, 5, then I would put them all at the end.

10AnnieMod
aug 19, 2019, 1:55 am

So at which point does it need reworking? After 1? After 2? :) most series do start up somewhat straight forward. Then they get crazy.

11r.orrison
Redigerat: aug 19, 2019, 2:27 am

I agree with >9 Stevil2001: and think the answer to >10 AnnieMod: is when it gets bad enough to annoy me enough to fix it. :-)

One other case when I think omnibuses are nicer inline is when the omnibus was the original edition, but was later re-published as two volumes (this often happens with European editions of big US books). (And yes, it's not really an omnibus, but it might look like it after the fact.) E.g.
- book 1
- book 1 part 1/2
- book 1 part 2/2
- book 2
- book 2 part 1/2
- book 2 part 2/2

12MarthaJeanne
aug 19, 2019, 3:56 am

>9 Stevil2001: What I don't like about that is that it leaves gaps in the checkmarks.

13gilroy
aug 19, 2019, 5:15 am

>9 Stevil2001: It annoys me to see that, so I start fixing as soon as I see. Sorry.

14norabelle414
aug 19, 2019, 10:57 am

>9 Stevil2001: This is my stance as well

15SandraArdnas
aug 19, 2019, 11:30 am

I've never come across so many omnibuses in a series that I find the series page particularly affected whether 1-3 is placed after 3 or at the end. Short stories are another 'story'. I wish all anthologies containing them would be moved to the end, instead of taking an entire scrennpage between 1 and 2 in the series. Can I pretty please edit them and leave only the shorty story as a single work as say 1.5, moving all the gazillion anthologies containing them at the very end?

16lorax
aug 19, 2019, 11:33 am

SandraArdnas (#15):

Anthologies containing a short story in a series are not part of that series, and should be removed if you find them. This is a mild annoyance on the series page and an enormous one for people owning the anthologies who suddenly find dozens upon dozens of series showing up.

17SandraArdnas
aug 19, 2019, 11:38 am

>16 lorax: Yes, I find dozens of series for my anthologies annoying too, but it's quite common and I didn't really consider the more radical approach of deleting them altogether as it seems 'community standard'

18lorax
Redigerat: aug 19, 2019, 11:52 am

If it's community standard, then it's a new standard; the old community standard was to delete them. I may have missed a discussion, though. If the new consensus (as based on actual conversations, not on "a bunch of people do this") is to allow it, then moving them is probably the least-worst option.

(And I'll add that standard or no, saying "The Year's Best SF Volume Whatever is part of these twelve series because it contains stories from each" is wrong.)

19SandraArdnas
aug 19, 2019, 12:30 pm

I inferred it as community standard because it's so common. I'm not aware of any discussion. I joined less then 2 years ago, and since it was all over the place, I just assumed there's either explicit or tacit wide agreement on the practice

20r.orrison
Redigerat: aug 19, 2019, 1:29 pm

I strongly agree with >16 lorax:. An anthology is not part of a series just because one story out of the 20 in it is part of the series.

However... I'll only remove the anthology from the series if the short story is cataloged on its own, so that it can be listed in the series and included a work-to-work relationship with the anthology.

E.g. in the Dresden Files series, I won't delete Straight Outta Tombstone because Fistful of Warlocks isn't cataloged in LibraryThing, even though Straight Outta Tombstone is clearly not part of the Dresden Files series.

21amanda4242
aug 19, 2019, 1:54 pm

>20 r.orrison: That's my policy, too. Of course I then come back to a series and discover someone has reentered all of the anthologies (and sometimes removed the individual stories).

22aspirit
Redigerat: aug 19, 2019, 3:14 pm

>20 r.orrison: but isn't that story in the second Dresden Files anthology, Brief Cases? ETA: It is.

I don't see why the original, mixed-series anthology would be needed in the series list anymore.

23gilroy
aug 19, 2019, 3:15 pm

I admit, I don't like undoing other's hard work. So I drop anthologies, omnibi, and the like to the bottom of the listing. This slows most edit wars because the data is still there, just out of the way of the accurate listings. Especially if the individual stories are there on their own.

24r.orrison
Redigerat: aug 19, 2019, 3:29 pm

>22 aspirit: May be so, but the point is that the story itself isn't cataloged so it can't (currently) be listed in the series. I'm sure plenty more examples could be found.

(Edit: I've fixed it - I cataloged the short story in my Wishlist)

25MarthaJeanne
Redigerat: aug 19, 2019, 3:27 pm

Entering a story to include it (and not the whole anthology) in a series list is not the same as entering it to create work-to-work relationships.

26Cynfelyn
Redigerat: aug 19, 2019, 5:16 pm

>15 SandraArdnas: I've never come across so many omnibuses in a series that I find the series page particularly affected whether 1-3 is placed after 3 or at the end.

Wow. You're a pretty understanding soul. Especially seeing as you seem to have most of Terry Pratchett's titles. With 41 titles and 28 omnibuses, I would certainly find the Discworld series page "particularly affected".

ETA. Hmm. Doesn't seem to like the "a hef=https..." link to the Discworld series page, https://www.librarything.com/series/Discworld

27r.orrison
aug 19, 2019, 5:20 pm

>26 Cynfelyn:
You can do <a href="/series/Discworld">Discworld</a> which doesn't specify the protocol or site - so if you're on the German site it won't force you over to the English site.

28Cynfelyn
aug 19, 2019, 5:38 pm

>27 r.orrison: Thanks for the message. I was using the English www site and used the same Discworld series URL as in my ETA message, but if you hover your cursor over it, you'll see the URL for this thread. Weird.

29SandraArdnas
Redigerat: aug 19, 2019, 9:04 pm

>26 Cynfelyn: Have to say I've never looked at the Discworld series page before now. But anyway, my main point was to indicate numerous entries for the same short story in between two volumes are MY main gripe

30Stevil2001
aug 19, 2019, 11:43 pm

>13 gilroy: This isn't something I feel terribly strongly about. Like, I would never move omnibi into a series list if I found them at the end. Fix away!

31aspirit
aug 20, 2019, 7:52 am

>25 MarthaJeanne: that's where my thoughts are. The Dresden Files series list is a mess, not only with the anthologies. The graphic novels should be in their own series, not shoved between the prose novels as if they're a part of the main series. The individual short stories further complicate the use of the series list. (Those should be linked in work-to-work relationships instead.)

When different forms of work are listed in a changing order, we can't scan through to easily see which checkmarks for the novels are missing. There's also more confusion about where a particular work fits.

Considering The Dresden Files has me thinking that omnibus should remain at the end. Someone who's borrowing or purchasing isn't likely to jump between omnibus editions and single books when they don't have to. In my opinion, matching with what I see has been standard practice on LT, the individual books should take priority at the top with omnibus at the end.

32aspirit
aug 20, 2019, 8:10 am

>24 r.orrison: the point is that Straight Outta Tombstone and the anthologies like it don't belong in the series. Those works were problems in the list before the short stories were added, and they continue to be.

33r.orrison
Redigerat: aug 20, 2019, 8:53 am

>32 aspirit: The point I was making was that non-anthologies don't belong in the series. Straight Outta Tombstone was an example, bringing up that A Fistful of Warlocks is also in another anthology which did belong in the series just muddied the waters. Anyway...

>31 aspirit:
I very much like the interleaving of novels and short stories in cronological order in the Dresden Files series (and they are in work-to-work relationships, but that doesn't help understand what's happening in the series). The only anthologies that are left in that series listing do actually belong to the series, and are tucked away at the end of the list, with the omnibuses. I would also be happy with the graphic novels at the end, or in a separate series.

34andyl
aug 20, 2019, 4:33 pm

>18 lorax:

I agree with lorax here. I think the main discussion was some 8 years ago in this discussion and I can't think of any others. However that doesn't stop some people from continually adding anthologies and magazines and collections to series incorrectly.

35humouress
aug 22, 2019, 2:44 am

>12 MarthaJeanne: >31 aspirit: Well, I'll leave the omnibus where they are but the series I have omnibus editions are mixed in with single novel volumes because the publishers didn't continue with omnibus (which I prefer because they take less out of my wallet and take up less space on my shelves). And therefore, I have gaps in my checkmarks - which is why I asked the question in the first place.

Now if there was some way in which cataloguing the omnibus would also generate corresponding checkmarks against the books that comprised them, I'd be happy.

36SandraArdnas
Redigerat: aug 22, 2019, 3:13 am

>35 humouress: There's an RSI asking for that, making better use of work-to-work relationships. Whether it will happen at some time, I don't know, but it is a widely desired feature. It would also probably stop people from entering anthologies into series because they would see a checkmark for the individual story.

37jjwilson61
aug 22, 2019, 10:42 am

>35 humouress: I've dealt with this problem (actually I did it for recommendations but it works for this too) by adding an Inclusions collection where a add the individual works that are in any omnibus that I own. For these works I do not also include them in any other collections. It messes up my All Collections count, but I think that's a small price to pay to get recommendations from both people who read the omnibus and those that read the individual works.

38humouress
aug 22, 2019, 1:19 pm

>37 jjwilson61:. Thanks. That might be the way around it (until we get the checkmarks). 😊

39norabelle414
aug 22, 2019, 1:27 pm

If I recall correctly there was also a recommendation at some point to have collapsible series, where you could have the option of viewing everything in a series or only the main works, but I could be mis-remembering.

40rosalita
aug 22, 2019, 1:29 pm

>37 jjwilson61: I've started doing this as well (I call my collection Contained Elsewhere) and it has really helped when viewing series and trying to avoid buying/reading things twice.

41elenchus
aug 22, 2019, 1:40 pm

>37 jjwilson61:
>40 rosalita:

Nice workaround. Am I right in thinking it doesn't capture the reverse very well: that is, pulling in recommendations / reviews for omnibus editions that include a single work in my catalogue? To do that, I'd have to add the omnibus to my special collection, and of course there's not just one such work out there so I'd have to keep my special collection current with new omnibus releases.

This isn't a criticism of your approaches, merely attempting to understand the logic of it. If valid, it's another argument for the implementation of a more robust work-to-work relationship in LT.

But I still could use the special collection approach in the meantime, for the benefits you identify.

42norabelle414
aug 22, 2019, 2:05 pm

>41 elenchus: Recommendations are really dependent on other people's behavior. If other people are following the same process - adding individual stories to a special collection regardless of what omnibus they were in - then you will get accurate recommendations without having to add omnibuses that you have not read. But not everyone is doing that. If you want to get every possible recommendation for a story, then yes you will need to add every omnibus that story is in, but that will also get you lots of junk recommendations for stories that you have not read that happen to be in those omnibuses.