Definitions

[carolynwhite2]

Jen:

Do you think it would be useful for several of us
interested in reviewing to stay back and finish all the categories
while others forge ahead with coding? It could be messy if you open
up a category one day to find a bunch of new posts added, but if
we're basically on the same page for how to code stuff, that might
not be a huge deal. Just wondering. I'm a bit of a L.O.O.N and like
the idea of cleaning out all the categories, especially the posts
coded before the Category list was finalized. 

Carolyn:
I don't mind either way. The only thing I'd say is that those who 
start to code are under a huge obligation to keep up with all the 
definitions and category changes as we move forwards. Although it is 
fine choosing categories we like to review, unfortunately it is also 
essential to get your minds around the definitions for the categories 
you don't like so much, or the whole problem will begin all over 
again.

SO, with that in mind:


Talisman (previously):
Also, are we keeping track of the updated definitions for
categories? Was I supposed to be taking notes? Oops. May I suggest
that we set up a database wherein the people (each of us) who have
reviewed a given category, received feedback, and arrived at a
clarified definition can post this information in one comprehensive
document? Then, if we continue to fill in definitions as we finish
categories, the master list will be updated and we won't have to
search back through posts (or say eff it).


Talisman, now:
Heaven knows I defer completely to Paul and others Carolyn, Sean?)
regarding what is possible with Yahoo. But my hope was to have
something _concise_, handy, and not labor intensive for one or two
people (e.g. Carolyn & Paul).

Carolyn, I think your new files TO DATE (collecting the discussions)
could help people prepare their current consolidated definitions
(which could also receive further feed back) but that 1) re-reading
the discussions while in the process of coding would be very
difficult; 2)It's, hopefully, an unneccesay job for you to keep
gathering these.

Just from the example of the Database wherein we all "edited" to
claim a review section and then to note completion thereof, I
thought we could have one, organized by category/number that each of
us could "edit" to supply the new consensus definition. This isn't
possible?

I agree, Kelly, these definitions should ultimately go into the
happy little "d" into the actual catalogue. (But, because this
requires accessing at a sensitive level, it's not something I think
all of us should be doing).

So, because we are "in process;" there may be some definitions that
haven't gelled; and, Carolyn and Paul have plenty on their plates, I
thought that an interim--member edited-- database might be helpful.
Still no?

Talisman

Carolyn:
I have been thinking of all this for some time. Unfortunately, the 
Yahoo database function behaves badly with numbers and with a lot of 
text in it. However, this morning I have gone through and set up two 
tables covering most of section 1, text analysis. I will plod on over 
the next few days and put the rest of the sections up as well - 
anyone who wants to help me is welcome!

Can everyone have a look at this, and note that I have provided space 
to write a new definition in each case. When you do this, please 
remove the old definition. I will then paste all the new definitions 
into the live database for ready reference as we are cataloguing.

I suggest you refer to the long discussions which I have pasted 
together in the file section, to refresh your memory of what people 
have thought about each section as we have dealt with it. I will 
continue to keep these up to date, as they are an invaluable record 
for us, and near impossible to reconstruct after the event.

Some health warnings:
- the bloody, EFFING Yah dbase will not number sequentially once you 
get beyond the number ten, so I am really sorry, you will have to 
scroll through the sections bit by bit to find the category you want. 
The search function on the database is quite efficient though, if you 
put in a bit of distinctive text or a number it will get your section 
quite quickly.
- we are continually making changes to the number order of the 
sections (eg merging authorial intent & subversion today). This will 
need manually updating on the dbase all the time. No way of 
shortcutting that I can think of.
- the old short definitions file in the file section is very out of 
date now. I am putting up a roughcut cleaned up version today, but 
don't rely on it overmuch. I will take it down altogether once we 
have these new database sections up and running.

Talisman:
Finally, for those who routinely feel the urge to throttle me, I
have uploaded a photo to my profile--hot from the memory card--which
can be printed off as a useful dart board. I recommend that you get
everything in order before I recommence posting on TOC.

The ambush interrupted my hunting down of elusive HP citations,
which explains my swotty look, and made me think it an appropriate--
if not particularly flattering--image for my HP activities. I do
think Snape and I would make a cute couple, though, don't you?

Carolyn:
Throttle you? Throw darts? Never! Definitely getting a front-row seat 
for the promised fireworks..it's been a long time... But possibly 
just as well Snape doesn't seem to have much experience with women. 
There is just a teensy little look in your eye which should warn him, 
if he had any sense...

...Wanders off to peer doubtfully at the one of me where I'd had one 
too many at a launch party..or maybe the one dozing in the 
garden..dammit, I can't really look like this, can I? Dismisses 
possibility as too frightful to contemplate..