Platform in Baf's guide
kodrik
Baf's guide as a starting point.
Under platform in Baf's guide, OS are listed as well as Engines:
http://www.wurb.com/if/platform
I don't unerstand what it means, If I click on Windows, I get a list
shorter than that of TADS.
Does it means it's the list of window's games using a custom engine
and no TADS games are listed here?
Stephen Granade
Right. TADS games can run on a variety of platforms, so it's easier to
list them in a separate TADS category, and leave the Windows-only
games in that category. This is true also of Inform, AGT, &c. games.
Stephen
--
Stephen Granade
sgra...@phy.duke.edu
Duke University, Physics Dept
Fredrik Ramsberg
> kod...@zc8.net (kodrik) writes:
>
> > I'm starting the If public db today and i'm grabbing content from
> > Baf's guide as a starting point.
> > Under platform in Baf's guide, OS are listed as well as Engines:
> > http://www.wurb.com/if/platform
> >
> > I don't unerstand what it means, If I click on Windows, I get a list
> > shorter than that of TADS.
> > Does it means it's the list of window's games using a custom engine
> > and no TADS games are listed here?
>
> Right. TADS games can run on a variety of platforms, so it's easier to
> list them in a separate TADS category, and leave the Windows-only
> games in that category. This is true also of Inform, AGT, &c. games.
For this DB to be as easily accessible as possible even to newcomers,
maybe TADS games should be listed under Windows sa well, with a section
on which TADS interpreters can be used under Windows. (And the same
goes for other OS's and IF systems as well of course)
In fact, I've often wondered why the Z-code interpreter section of
if-archive isn't organized by OS rather than interpreter name. Think about
it -- when you get to the directory infocom/interpreters to download an
interpreter, it's much more likely that you know which OS you are running
than the names of the interpreters that support it. If you do know the
name of the interpreter you want, you still have to know what OS you want
it to run on, so you'll find it anyway.
Or should the if-archive remain as it is, a bit hard to grasp for newbies
perhaps, and a site be built that organizes it differently, with a focus
on newbies? You could perhaps think of it as a Wizard Mode to if-archive.
Or is this actually already a part of the IF DB idea?
/Fredrik
Stephen Granade
> In fact, I've often wondered why the Z-code interpreter section of
> if-archive isn't organized by OS rather than interpreter name. Think about
> it -- when you get to the directory infocom/interpreters to download an
> interpreter, it's much more likely that you know which OS you are running
> than the names of the interpreters that support it. If you do know the
> name of the interpreter you want, you still have to know what OS you want
> it to run on, so you'll find it anyway.
True, but arranging by operating system would require a number of
tangly links. For example, Nitfol is based on Glk and has source code
which can conceivably be compiled on a number of systems. If we
divided interpreters up by operating system, each and every operating
system in which Nitfol could be compiled would need a symlink in its
appropriate directory. At this point I think your second suggestion,
that of creating a separate index to the archive that organizes
interpreters by OS, would be better.
kodrik
> perhaps, and a site be built that organizes it differently, with a focus
> on newbies? You could perhaps think of it as a Wizard Mode to if-archive.
> Or is this actually already a part of the IF DB idea?
This is the idea of the db, to make it easy for newbies to use.
Of course, newbies have no idea of engines so every game should be by
OS.
So someone could say, show me all horror games that will work of my
Macintosh, and the list will be returned. Each entry is linked to a
file in the IF archive.
This is pretty easy to do, w just add a relation engine/OS, since we
already have the relation game/engine, getting to game/OS is quite
easy.
I'll have something to show by the weekend.
BAF's db has been a great base to start it and I hope we can all help
each other out to promote IF.
T Raymond
> True, but arranging by operating system would require a number of
> tangly links. For example, Nitfol is based on Glk and has source
> code which can conceivably be compiled on a number of systems. If
> we divided interpreters up by operating system, each and every
> operating system in which Nitfol could be compiled would need a
> symlink in its appropriate directory. At this point I think your
> second suggestion, that of creating a separate index to the
> archive that organizes interpreters by OS, would be better.
List executables by OS and have a source directory like most of the
if systems have in their directory structure? But I might just be
ramble at the keys again?
Tom
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Tom Raymond af956 AT osfnDOTorg
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Carl Muckenhoupt
f...@mail.com says...
>
> For this DB to be as easily accessible as possible even to newcomers,
> maybe TADS games should be listed under Windows sa well, with a section
> on which TADS interpreters can be used under Windows. (And the same
> goes for other OS's and IF systems as well of course)
This is a good suggestion. I have two worries about it:
1) The pages for Windows and Macintosh would become extremely long.
2) For a scheme designed to make it easily accessible to newcomers, it
has a great deal of potential of confusing them. It would have to be
made extremely clear which games in the Windows listing won't simply run
under Windows and why. (Z-code is a particular problem because people
seeing the .z5 extension for the first time usually make the completely
reasonable guess that it's a compression format, like .zip or .zoo.)
A compromise would be to give the page for each platform a set of
prominently-displayed links to the pages for each platform that runs
under it. These pages would, as always, contain descriptions of the
platform and links to terps. How satisfying would you find this
approach?
Also, as to the question that started this thread: My operational
definition of "platform" is "that which you need in order to run a game".
This could be a particular kind of hardware (or an emulator for that
hardware), a particular operating system, or an interpreter. (In the
peculiar and much-agonized-over case of Eamon, it's a combination of a
particular kind of hardware and an additional piece of software.) By
this definition, Windows fails to be the "platform" for TADS or Z-code
games in two respects: you need more than just Windows to run them, and
you can run them without Windows.
Daniel Dawson
written by Carl Muckenhoupt <ca...@wurb.com>. It says:
[A bunch of stuff about OSs and platforms]
After reading to this point, I think that while the DB should keep the idea of
OS and (interpreter) platform separate, the interface would do well to present
Z-code, TADS, etc. entries under a given OS listing as being Z-code, TADS, etc.
To illustrate what I (we?) mean:
Games compatible with Windows
=============================
Name Platform ...
--------- ---------
Foo.exe Windows
Bar.z5 Z-machine [Note: this might be a link to a description of Z-code]
Baz.gam TADS [Ditto]
...
[Or something along these lines]
I think this would be about the simplest format. If you need to link to
separate Z-machine/TADS pages, it really needs to be clear what's going on
("Yes, those will also run on (Windows|Mac)."). Maybe include a brief
explanation by the link, or another link to the effect "What is TADS?"
Well, just some thoughts. I hope it goes well.
--
Daniel Dawson
dda...@nospam-altavista.net (remove 'nospam-' to send mail)