Fwd: Feature Committee Report for the board

[Donald Dale Milne]

    I am forwarding the following final report from Adam Knights, chair
of the Feature Committee, for the board's consideration.  Please read,
comment and discuss.  We can adopt as is, reject, or modify the report. 
Adopting or modifying the report will create new rules or modify
existing rules for indexers.

    Unfortunately, as Adam notes, there were some problems with
committee members unable to complete their terms.  For this and other
reasons, Adam notes that the committee accomplished less than he hoped,
leaving some issues unresolved.  We may wish to address these now or
leave them for a future time.

- Don Milne

[Donald Dale Milne]

    I'm a looking back through open discussions on the Board list. The
first from this year is the Feature Committee report.  If there is no
discussion, I'll ask for a motion to adopt so we can move on and
consider this completed.

- Don Milne

[Matthew Gore]

So moved, or if somebody already made the motion, seconded.

---

From: gcd-...@googlegroups.com <gcd-...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Donald Dale Milne <dond...@att.net>
Sent: Monday, July 28, 2025 9:17 AM
To: gcd-...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [gcd-board] Fwd: Feature Committee Report for the board

 

--
--
GCD-Board mailing list - gcd-...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe send email to gcd-board+...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/gcd-board

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "gcd-board" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to gcd-board+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/gcd-board/6188b9aa-cb78-4ec7-8581-cb6ca4cd2d75%40att.net.

[Scott Novick]

I didn’t see a motion, so if I’m correct that there isn’t one, I’ll second yours. 

— Scott Novick

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/gcd-board/b44d619001b14204ac5b8dd22a4766c1%40cumberland.org.

[Jochen G.]

I am not sure that I would for vote it without any discussion.

So far just didn't have time, and won't in the next few weeks.

Jochen

Am 28.07.25 um 16:17 schrieb Donald Dale Milne:

[Donald Dale Milne]

    What exactly IS the motion?

- Don Milne

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/gcd-board/b44d619001b14204ac5b8dd22a4766c1%40cumberland.org.

[Ronald Sadowski]

Under Robert's Rules of Order: 

     A report submitted to the body can be considered in whole with a 2nd (the report itself is the motion).

     For there to be discussions on the report it needs to be 2nd.

     During the discussions amendments to change or remover items from the report are permissible.

     Amendments need be proposed (like a motion) and 2nd. 

     You can Divide the Question  which allows the report to be broken into stand alone items to be voted on individually by the body.

     Also once the report is 2nd it can be Tabled.  This means the discussion will happen at a later time (say at the next meeting). 

         This is done to give the body time to read the report and prepare amendments .

The Chair is the ultimate arbitrator of any of these rules.

I hope this helps in moving things forward.

-Ron

[Donald Dale Milne]

    Thanks for the details.  That's the pattern we usually follow, but from Matt's e-mail I am not sure if his intent is a motion to "adopt in full", or something else.  He was replying to my previous e-mail but I never stated what a motion would be.  Once I get that clarification, we'll get underway.

- Don Milne

On 7/29/2025 10:06 AM, Ronald Sadowski wrote:

Under Robert's Rules of Order: 

     A report submitted to the body can be considered in whole with a 2nd (the report itself is the motion).

     For there to be discussions on the report it needs to be 2nd.

     During the discussions amendments to change or remover items from the report are permissible.

     Amendments need be proposed (like a motion) and 2nd. 

     You can Divide the Question  which allows the report to be broken into stand alone items to be voted on individually by the body.

     Also once the report is 2nd it can be Tabled.  This means the discussion will happen at a later time (say at the next meeting). 

         This is done to give the body time to read the report and prepare amendments .

The Chair is the ultimate arbitrator of any of these rules.

I hope this helps in moving things forward.

-Ron

On Monday, July 28, 2025 at 10:59:09 PM UTC-4 Don Milne wrote:

    What exactly IS the motion?

- Don Milne

On 7/28/2025 6:34 PM, 'Matthew Gore' via gcd-board wrote:

So moved, or if somebody already made the motion, seconded.

From: gcd-...@googlegroups.com <gcd-...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Donald Dale Milne <dond...@att.net>
Sent: Monday, July 28, 2025 9:17 AM

To: gcd-..@googlegroups.com

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/gcd-board/990ca3df-e25e-4dd2-8688-a9c73c881fc0n%40googlegroups.com.

[Matthew Gore]

"I'll ask for a motion to adopt," to which I responded "so moved."

---

From: gcd-...@googlegroups.com <gcd-...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Donald Dale Milne <dond...@att.net>

Sent: Friday, August 1, 2025 4:33 PM
To: gcd-...@googlegroups.com

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/gcd-board/9d52945d-46df-4256-99fa-b1bb3d61ebc7%40att.net.

[Donald Dale Milne]

    Thanks for the clarification.  So I will recognize both the motion to adopt the report in full and the second that was offered, and we can now discuss.

- Don Milne

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/gcd-board/8d5530478460462b8a64779c53062482%40cumberland.org.

[Donald Dale Milne]

    Re-reading the report, I note that implementation would require some work by tech (Jochen).  I would hesitate to adopt this without some comments from him.

- Don Milne

[Jochen G.]

I won't be able to look into this due to vacation. I'll try in 2-3 weeks.

Am 06.08.25 um 15:32 schrieb Donald Dale Milne:

>     Re-reading the report, I note that implementation would require
> some work by tech (Jochen).  I would hesitate to adopt this without some
> comments from him.
>
> - Don Milne
>
> On 8/6/2025 8:04 AM, Donald Dale Milne wrote:
>>     Thanks for the clarification.  So I will recognize both the motion
>> to adopt the report in full and the second that was offered, and we
>> can now discuss.
>>
>> - Don Milne
>>
>> On 8/4/2025 3:56 PM, 'Matthew Gore' via gcd-board wrote:
>>>
>>> "I'll ask for a motion to adopt," to which I responded "so moved."
>>>
>>>
>>>

>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> *From:* gcd-...@googlegroups.com <gcd-...@googlegroups.com> on

>>> behalf of Donald Dale Milne <dond...@att.net>

>>> *Sent:* Friday, August 1, 2025 4:33 PM
>>> *To:* gcd-...@googlegroups.com
>>> *Subject:* Re: [gcd-board] Fwd: Feature Committee Report for the board

>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> *From:* gcd-...@googlegroups.com <gcd-...@googlegroups.com> on

>>>>> behalf of Donald Dale Milne <dond...@att.net>

>>>>> *Sent:* Monday, July 28, 2025 9:17 AM
>>>>> *To:* gcd-..@googlegroups.com
>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [gcd-board] Fwd: Feature Committee Report for

>>>>> b44d619001b14204ac5b8dd22a4766c1%40cumberland.org <https://
>>>>> groups.google.com/d/msgid/gcd-board/
>>>>> b44d619001b14204ac5b8dd22a4766c1%40cumberland.org?
>>>>> utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> --
>>>> GCD-Board mailing list - gcd-...@googlegroups.com
>>>> To unsubscribe send email to gcd-board+...@googlegroups.com
>>>> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/
>>>> group/gcd-board
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups "gcd-board" group.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
>>>> send an email to gcd-board+...@googlegroups.com.
>>>> To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/gcd-

>>>> board/990ca3df-e25e-4dd2-8688-a9c73c881fc0n%40googlegroups.com
>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/gcd-board/990ca3df-
>>>> e25e-4dd2-8688-a9c73c881fc0n%40googlegroups.com?
>>>> utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

>>>
>>> --
>>> --
>>> GCD-Board mailing list - gcd-...@googlegroups.com
>>> To unsubscribe send email to gcd-board+...@googlegroups.com
>>> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/
>>> gcd-board
>>>
>>> ---
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "gcd-board" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
>>> send an email to gcd-board+...@googlegroups.com.
>>> To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/gcd-

>>> board/9d52945d-46df-4256-99fa-b1bb3d61ebc7%40att.net <https://
>>> groups.google.com/d/msgid/gcd-board/9d52945d-46df-4256-99fa-
>>> b1bb3d61ebc7%40att.net?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

>>> --
>>> --
>>> GCD-Board mailing list - gcd-...@googlegroups.com
>>> To unsubscribe send email to gcd-board+...@googlegroups.com
>>> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/
>>> gcd-board
>>>
>>> ---
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "gcd-board" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
>>> send an email to gcd-board+...@googlegroups.com.
>>> To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/gcd-

>>> board/8d5530478460462b8a64779c53062482%40cumberland.org <https://
>>> groups.google.com/d/msgid/gcd-
>>> board/8d5530478460462b8a64779c53062482%40cumberland.org?
>>> utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

>>
>
> --
> --
> GCD-Board mailing list - gcd-...@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe send email to gcd-board+...@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/

> gcd-board <http://groups.google.com/group/gcd-board>

>
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "gcd-board" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send

> an email to gcd-board+...@googlegroups.com <mailto:gcd-
> board+un...@googlegroups.com>.

> To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/gcd-

> board/76c3a78c-fefa-4d4f-8b84-2693a59c52ca%40att.net <https://
> groups.google.com/d/msgid/gcd-board/76c3a78c-
> fefa-4d4f-8b84-2693a59c52ca%40att.net?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

[Donald Dale Milne]

    Then I won't pursue a resolution of this until you can comment.
Anyone else, feel free to continue a discussion.  I will bring up
something else from the agenda in the meantime.

- Don Milne

[Donald Dale Milne]

    OK, a month has passed, so I'm opening this up again to see if
Jochen has some comments on the tech side of this.

- Don Milne

[Jochen G.]

I don't understand this distinction of a feature with several names, due
to a major name change, in case of translations ?

- Multiple names on features should be added to allow for when a feature
remains the same, but experiences a major name change. The combined name
should continue to be the main name, with additional names added for the
split

- Tech may wish to also propose using multiple names for a different
feature translation system, and can do so on policy

This needs to be addressed and decided before there can be any
implementation. It is not up to tech to propose that on policy.

Jochen

Am 10.04.25 um 15:15 schrieb Donald Dale Milne:

[Donald Dale Milne]

    My thoughts on the report follow.

New Field: Description
    I do not see the difference between the existing Notes field and the proposed Description field.  Most existing Notes are or include a description of the Feature, noting such ideas as genre, characters, creator, dates, history, etc.
    It seems to me that information on any previous GCD debate over whether the feature should exist or to aid in explaining why it meets the GCD definition of a feature can also be included here, if needed.  I therefore disagree with creating this new field.

Multiple Names on Features
    We currently handle multiple names to cover features that fundamentally remained unchanged other than a
name change in various ways:

1. Listing each name as separate Feature Objects even though there is no fundamental change in the feature.  I think this is the least desirable and most confusing method.
2. Listing multiple names using a "/" between, as in "Captain Marvel / Shazam!", "Mutt and Jeff / Mutt & Jeff", or "メイドインアビス / Made in Abyss".
3. Listing multiple names using square brackets, as in "Captain Marvel [Shazam!]", "Mutt and Jeff [Mutt & Jeff]", or "メイドインアビス [Made in Abyss]".
4. Listing multiple names using a ";" between, as in "Captain Marvel; Shazam!", "Mutt and Jeff; Mutt & Jeff", or "メイドインアビス; Made in Abyss".

    I believe #2 is the best method, as it visually gives equal weight to each name and a single search can find either name every time.  I agree with the recommendation that we use this combined name format for multiple names.  Method #3 can be read that Shazam is less important, being in brackets.  Additionally, the brackets can be confused with our use in disambiguation.  Method #4 reads as two separate features, as we generally use the semi-colon to separate names that way.

    I agree that minor differences in name should continue to be tracked via feature logos.  I disagree with the idea of adding additional names, similar to what we do for characters and creators, because the continued use of Method #2 plus Feature Logos renders additional names unnecessary.

New Types of Features
    I agree with the committee conclusion not to add any new types of Feature Objects at this time.

Features and Universes
    I agree with the committee that features such as Spider-Man and Ultimate Spider-Man, which fundamentally differ only in the universe in which the feature is set, to be redundant and recommend they be consolidated back into their ‘main’ feature.  Features that differ in concept but happen to also differ by universe, should continue to be treated as separate features.

Storylines / Crossovers
    Implementation of our previously approved concept of story arcs has recently been completed by Jochen.  Therefore, I would recommend we make no changes for these concepts at this time and consider any changes in our usual manner on our Policy list.

Feature Relations
    As no recommendation was offered in the report, there is nothing to adopt regarding Feature Relations at this time.

Feature and Genre
    I agree with the committee recommendation that genre continue to be allowed on both features and sequences.

- Don Milne

[Donald Dale Milne]

    No other discussion has come in, so I will temporarily step out of my role of Chair and turn those duties over to the Secretary to acknowledge the following proposal and ask for second.  I now offer a proposal of amendments to the motion to adopt the Feature Committee's report:

1. I move to amend the motion by deleting the recommendation to create a Description field.
2. I move to amend the motion to replace the recommendation for Multiple Feature Names with the following: We list multiple names for a Feature Object by using a single name combining the several known names, with a "/" between the several names, as in "Captain Marvel / Shazam!", "Mutt and Jeff / Mutt & Jeff", or "メイドインアビス / Made in Abyss".

- Don Milne

--
--
GCD-Board mailing list - gcd-...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe send email to gcd-board+...@googlegroups.com

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/gcd-board

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "gcd-board" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to gcd-board+...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/gcd-board/6a864fd7-99e3-4d26-a908-eeb80fabe47f%40att.net.

[Jochen G.]

seconded so that we can discuss.

Am 14.10.25 um 00:27 schrieb Donald Dale Milne:

>     No other discussion has come in, so I will temporarily step out of
> my role of Chair and turn those duties over to the Secretary to
> acknowledge the following proposal and ask for second.  I now offer a
> proposal of amendments to the motion to adopt the Feature Committee's
> report:
>

> 1. I move to amend the motion by deleting the recommendation to create
> a Description field.

I disagree with that. We should add a description field to most of our
objects, i.e. also publishers or series. Keep notes for additional stuff
that is on top.

> 2. I move to amend the motion to replace the recommendation for

> Multiple Feature Names with the following: We list multiple names
> for a Feature Object by using a single name combining the several
> known names, with a "/" between the several names, as in "Captain
> Marvel / Shazam!", "Mutt and Jeff / Mutt & Jeff", or "メイドインアビ
> ス / Made in Abyss".

Do we really want to have "Mutt and Jeff / Mutt & Jeff" ? Isn't that a
minor change as outlined in the document ?
I am not sure if that amendment also is supposed to include translations
? If not, I'll make a separate amendment.
What is "Made in Abyss" in "メイドインアビス / Made in Abyss" ? The English name
of a Japanese feature ? Used or not used in Japanese sequences ?

Jochen

[Jochen G.]

Am 14.10.25 um 08:54 schrieb 'Jochen G.' via gcd-board:

To clarify after reading your mail from some days ago, you are removing
the additional names from this as well ? That would mean you want to
remove the two action points from the feature committee report ?
Then it would be easier to not approve the report at all, because it
would have been totally overwritten and the outcome would not represent
what the feature committee has written down.

Jochen

[Jochen G.]

Am 22.09.25 um 00:07 schrieb Donald Dale Milne:

>     I agree that minor differences in name should continue to be
> tracked via feature logos.  I disagree with the idea of adding
> additional names, similar to what we do for characters and creators,
> because the continued use of Method #2 plus Feature Logos renders
> additional names unnecessary.

There are features without logos that have different names. Without
additional names there is no way to track that.

Jochen

[sangorshop]

examples please.

thanks
Steven Rowe

> --
> --
> GCD-Board mailing list - gcd-...@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe send email to gcd-board+...@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/gcd-board
>
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "gcd-board" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to gcd-board+...@googlegroups.com.

> To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/gcd-board/fec20c19-3580-4a97-9498-d8d7af32eb50%40garcke.de.

[Donald Dale Milne]

    I'll take this as recognition of the motion and second.  Thanks,
Steven.

- Don Milne

[Donald Dale Milne]

    Then what is the intended difference between Description and
Notes?  I do not see any and the committee report does not clearly state
any.  If we are to create a new field, we should have a clear definition
of what it is intended to record.

    In general, if we adopt the recommendation for additional names,
would a dropbox list of Feature Objects list all names?  Would a search
for either name find the correct object?  Use of the "Mutt and Jeff /
Mutt & Jeff" style will correctly do both.

    Perhaps "メイドインアビス / Made in Abyss" is a poor example, because
it does appear to be the English name of a Japanese feature.  A
translated Feature Object would probably have been the correct way to
handle this, but someone has approved dozens in this style.

- Don Milne

[Jochen G.]

There were a couple of older examples on main in the thread by Eduardo.

Any current story with Captain Marvel.

Any current translation of formerly translated superheroes.

Jochen

Am 14.10.25 um 16:03 schrieb sangorshop:

[Jochen G.]

Am 14.10.25 um 18:41 schrieb Donald Dale Milne:

>     Then what is the intended difference between Description and
> Notes?  I do not see any and the committee report does not clearly state
> any.  If we are to create a new field, we should have a clear definition
> of what it is intended to record.

Then please ask the feature committee for that.

I assume it is similar to what we have for characters, so it would be:
Description - concise feature description, including background and
feature premise.
Notes - general notes, including background on their creation and
publication history.

>     In general, if we adopt the recommendation for additional names,
> would a dropbox list of Feature Objects list all names?  Would a search
> for either name find the correct object?  Use of the "Mutt and Jeff /

> Mutt & Jeff" style will correctly do both.It does so for creator and character names, and would do in the same
fashion work for feature names.

In the specific you gave, it is a minor variation that you would track
with feature logos, so it wouldn't be consistent in your ammendment to
treat it like this with both versions in the name.

>     Perhaps "メイドインアビス / Made in Abyss" is a poor example,
> because it does appear to be the English name of a Japanese feature.  A
> translated Feature Object would probably have been the correct way to
> handle this, but someone has approved dozens in this style.

For Japanese names (in different script) adding the English name in []
is currently the only way to identify the feature for non-Japanese
readers. Translated feature objects do not necessarily help there, we
don't show these in the dropdown.

Jochen

[Donald Dale Milne]

    I'm hoping we can get comment from at least one other member of the
Feature Committee. From what you have stated, I still see no difference
between Description and Notes.  Both are explanations of the feature and
either can include some background information. There is still no
differentiation on where to place creator information, dates,
publishers, etc.  If we use a single field, no decisions will need to be
made about all those details.  If we decide to use two fields, we will
need to tightly define both or they will be easily misused.

    The "Mutt and Jeff / Mutt & Jeff" style is actually necessitated
because different indexers have use these different text entries over
the years.  They may represent different logos or the names may not. 
There is no way to tell without reference to the actual comics.  "And"
and "&" are pretty freely used, often without reference to what is
written.  However, if the searches and dropdown boxes will work
correctly using multiple names in a single Feature Object, as you note,
I will withdraw my proposed amendment on this subject.

- Don Milne

[Jochen G.]

Am 14.10.25 um 22:38 schrieb Donald Dale Milne:

>     I'm hoping we can get comment from at least one other member of the
> Feature Committee. From what you have stated, I still see no difference
> between Description and Notes.  Both are explanations of the feature and
> either can include some background information. There is still no
> differentiation on where to place creator information, dates,
> publishers, etc.  If we use a single field, no decisions will need to be
> made about all those details.  If we decide to use two fields, we will
> need to tightly define both or they will be easily misused.

It works for characters, I see no reason that it wouldn't work for
features. Same for creators, one is specific for a biography, the notes
are about anything else that comes up. A description field gives focus.

And, it clearly states that background on their creation and publication
history goes into notes, so that addresses where creator information,
dates, publishers goes. This is not the content and premise of the feature.

Once more, we had the committee to discuss this. I see no real reason to
redo the discussion of the arguments here. I see a difference, and it is
consistent with newer database objects, you not see a difference. The
feature committee will have discussed this as well and came to
agreement. It would be interesting to know if it was controversial or
consensus. If strongly controversial, we can give it to policy to decide.

>     The "Mutt and Jeff / Mutt & Jeff" style is actually necessitated
> because different indexers have use these different text entries over
> the years.  They may represent different logos or the names may not.
> There is no way to tell without reference to the actual comics.  "And"
> and "&" are pretty freely used, often without reference to what is
> written.  However, if the searches and dropdown boxes will work
> correctly using multiple names in a single Feature Object, as you note,
> I will withdraw my proposed amendment on this subject.

Allowing this is the whole point of additional names.

Thanks, so we can proceed as the committee suggested for additional names.

Jochen

[Donald Dale Milne]

    I looked back at the committee records and found only two members
discussed this.  The main point of the proposed field was to, "act like
disambiguation but with more detail".  The only example given was
X-Factor, where that name has been used for several very different
features.  The counter example was that disambiguation works just as
well, as with Ms. Marvel.

    As no one else has offered any discussion, could you please call
the vote on this amendment, Steve?

- Don Milne