Genre Discussion [DONE/DENIED]

old granted and denied feature requests

Moderator: AniDB

Locked
bbaab
Posts: 78
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2003 2:13 pm

Post by bbaab » Mon Apr 18, 2005 2:23 pm

Just a little correction.
pelican wrote:(...)As far as the tree structure goes, I think you're too fixated on viewing these as genres and subgenres.
I'm not. Exp is. I'm fine with a looser directed graph structure (that is, a "genre" potentially being a "subgenre" of more than one other "genres").

User avatar
exp
Site Admin
Posts: 2438
Joined: Tue Oct 01, 2002 9:42 pm
Location: Nowhere

Post by exp » Mon Apr 18, 2005 6:49 pm

well, so far I planned to put it in a very easy db structure like

Code: Select all

id   integer,
name   varchar,
parentid   integer,
weight   integer,
...
where parentid points to the id of the category this entry belongs to (NULL for categories on the highest level).
for things like search requests the parent data would actually not be used at all. so it's really only there to allow a nicer display of the cats.

BYe!
EXP
Last edited by exp on Sun May 01, 2005 8:07 am, edited 1 time in total.

pelican
AniDB Staff
Posts: 234
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 11:19 pm

Post by pelican » Mon Apr 18, 2005 7:02 pm

bbaab wrote:
pelican wrote:(...)As far as the tree structure goes, I think you're too fixated on viewing these as genres and subgenres.
I'm not. Exp is. I'm fine with a looser directed graph structure (that is, a "genre" potentially being a "subgenre" of more than one other "genres").
That's not what I'm talking about. I meant that you seem to think that everything in this tree must be a true genre, which is clearly not so.

bbaab
Posts: 78
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2003 2:13 pm

Post by bbaab » Mon Apr 18, 2005 7:54 pm

pelican wrote:
bbaab wrote:
pelican wrote:(...)As far as the tree structure goes, I think you're too fixated on viewing these as genres and subgenres.
I'm not. Exp is. I'm fine with a looser directed graph structure (that is, a "genre" potentially being a "subgenre" of more than one other "genres").
That's not what I'm talking about. I meant that you seem to think that everything in this tree must be a true genre, which is clearly not so.
So far everyone seems to call them "genres", so genres I assume they are.

However, I don't have a problem with a bunch of category trees starting with "setting", "genre", "theme", "production technique", "story type", "ecchiness" and so on. I just prefer to find genres when I'm looking at a "genre:" label.

And I still think that a flat list of keywords, some 100-ish amount of them, grouped by whatever means we can think of (yes, even genres), is a better idea than a strict tree of "genres", half of which aren't.

pelican
AniDB Staff
Posts: 234
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 11:19 pm

Post by pelican » Mon Apr 18, 2005 9:19 pm

bbaab wrote:So far everyone seems to call them "genres", so genres I assume they are.
Then you may have missed this.

bbaab
Posts: 78
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2003 2:13 pm

Post by bbaab » Mon Apr 18, 2005 10:17 pm

pelican wrote:
bbaab wrote:So far everyone seems to call them "genres", so genres I assume they are.
Then you may have missed this.
Yep, I did indeed (well, at least at the time I wrote my posting). Doesn't invalidate the reminder of it, though. Especially not the fact that calling them "genres" is a stupid idea if they aren't.

User avatar
exp
Site Admin
Posts: 2438
Joined: Tue Oct 01, 2002 9:42 pm
Location: Nowhere

Post by exp » Tue Apr 19, 2005 4:52 pm

bbaab wrote:Yep, I did indeed (well, at least at the time I wrote my posting). Doesn't invalidate the reminder of it, though. Especially not the fact that calling them "genres" is a stupid idea if they aren't.
They will be called categories.

BYe!
EXP

Locked