Subject:
|
Re: Semi-ADMIN: Pause Train Reference Improvement Work in Good Shape
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.database, lugnet.trains
|
Date:
|
Thu, 25 Mar 1999 07:04:18 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
lpien@iwantnospam.ctpNOSPAM.com
|
Viewed:
|
1915 times
|
| |
|
|
Joshua Delahunty wrote:
>
> Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> >
> > Pedant alert...
>
> YOU'VE written "could care less..." and you're calling yourself
> pedantic? (kidding) :-) [Please don't start this flame again,
> I respect both sides of this argument, and just happen to believe
> that the "couldn't" crowd is the pedantic half]
Not starting the argument, but if I ever say "could care less..." (which
I try not to do, I'm on the "couldn't" side) you should tack on an
implied "but not MUCH less!", please.
> > One could make the argument that 2585 is mis-categorized. It's a self
> > propelled vehicle, not a car. Cars are characterised by not having
> > motive power.
>
> > Given the current choices (cars, locomotives, buildings,
> > Train Set (and why the different pluralizations??) )
>
> "Train Set" was "Train Sets", but it had the wrong "feel". If enough
> people
> dislike the lack of orthogonality, I'll change them (all the usages of
> Train Set) back.
>
> > I would put it with
> > locomotives.
>
> (With all deference to your superior train knowledge), that's really a
> stretch,
> IMHO. Ask people what a "hand car" is, and (I believe) they'll say it's
> a train car, and not a locomotive.
>
> Besides, one of my criteria for a Locomotive was that it included or
> could
> be retrofitted with a motor. 2585 would look mightly unwieldy attached
> to a motor. <g>
Two points, first, I bet I can motorize 2585 without making it all that
unwieldy. One of the PNLTCers has built a narrow gauge loco around a
micro motor. But more importantly, I was using this one as an example of
why I think the current categories may not be the best.
> > Also, all the sets returned by:
> > http://www.lugnet.com/pause/search/?query=Road+N%27+Rail are not cars,
> > they are self propelled and therefore ALSO belong with locomontives.
>
> The TRAIN portion of 4549 is not self-propelled, and so it fits under
> Train Cars.
Whoops, I forgot about 4549 being returned by that query. Just consider
the other ones. 4549 is misnamed by TLG anyway.
> The rest are self-propelled, but don't really fit the criteria that they
> have or take a train motor. I could introduce a "Vehicles" category, or
> "Support Vehicles", but introducing more categories seems a little silly
> to me. What do other folks think?
But I indeed think that we need about 2-3 more categories than we
currently have. A few new categories, and a bit of judicious rearranging
and Bob's your Uncle, as they say in the UK.
> I should perhaps point out that "Locomotives" was "Train Locomotives" at
> one point, in fact MOST of them secondary categorizations started with
> Train. It seemed redundant, so they were dropped. Again, with "Train
> Cars",
> it had the wrong "feel" without train on the front (and see below, about
> "Accessory Train Cars").
>
> > But I would stump for a new choice: "Maintenance of Way" (MOW), and put
> > the handcar, all 4 of the Road N'Rail sets, the 4533 rotary snow plow
> > and the 4552 crane in it. That last one is very clearly MOW too.
>
> This may fit the Train enthusiasts view, but I think the public at large
> would ask WTF? about such a categorization. I'm not saying I'm really
> against it, just that it doesn't have seem to have as generic a usage
> as might be desired. Again, what's the group consensus here?
Well, if Maintenance of Way doesn't work, how about "Equipment" to
capture the sense that these are not cars per se but they also are not
locomotives? That's the key point of this post... while a better
categorization that allows fuzziness and links to multiple slots IS
coming, it's not here yet and I think a little tweaking might help. Add
one or two, move a few items...
<snip Timmy's travails>
Yes, I agree. But still, 3225 is miscategorized. Under your previous
test of having a motor, this set is a locomotive. But it has cars too.
Maybe we note in remarks whether a set has a regulator and or track, but
categorize any TLG offering with a locomotive (that is, a motorized
unit) and at least one non powered car as a "set" ??
Don't get me wrong, I think this was a much needed cleanup, but it still
needs tweaking.
--
Larry Pieniazek http://my.voyager.net/lar
FDIC Know your Customer is wounded, thanks to you, but not dead...
See http://www.defendyourprivacy.com for details
For me: No voyager e-mail please. All snail-mail to Ada, please.
- Posting Binaries to RTL causes flamage... Don't do it, please.
- Stick to the facts when posting about others, please.
- This is a family newsgroup, thanks.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
13 Messages in This Thread:
   
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
Active threads in Database
|
|
|
|
|
|
