Charts and Graphs bugs topic part 2

Additional bugs to be added here.

Nooooo, don't add more bugs!

>2 anglemark:

Additional bugs to be REPORTED here. I apologize.

>3 lilithcat: Now, that was buggy!

>4 knerd.knitter: Phew!

anglemark (#5):

You've never seen convergent ladybugs, have you.



Not my photo, though I have seen this phenomenon. It's pretty cool.

>4 knerd.knitter: I'd like to report Lorax in nr 6.

>6 lorax: I've seen perhaps a hundred or so congregate on the same surface but never anything like that, no. Wow.

>6 lorax: I think I spotted Francis, but then I lost focus.

Oh, I found a _neat_ bug. I wanted to look at my first (or early) reviews. Went to Charts & Graphs, Ratings/Reviews, scrolled down to the text table, clicked on January 2008 where I had 27 reviews. Opened in my catalog, with 27 books filtered by Review Date: 2008-01. But it was sorted by Entry Date, not Read Date, so I clicked on Reading Dates to resort it - and the filter _changed_ to Publication Date: 2008-01 (and the list had 267 books). Repeated several times, it's consistent.

>10 jjmcgaffey: Very interesting! I followed your steps through, except after getting to "Your books" for my "Review date: 2015-09", I clicked to view a different display Style (C) that had my reading dates. The action changed the filter to "Publication Date: 2015-09", with No books found.

So any change of library display changes Review to Publication... I wonder what would happen if you filtered by Publication Date and changed the display?

I'm not sure whether this is a Charts and Graphs bug or a Common Knowledge bug, but since the C&G added the "original publication date" graph, I've gone through all the books marked "unknown" and added the original publication date (to the extent that it's findable). However, I've still got 186 books marked "unknown" even though most of those now have dates. When does this data recalculate? https://www.librarything.com/catalog/jonsweitzerlamme&collection=-1&orig...

>13 jonsweitzerlamme:

There seems to be an issue with "Unknown" Orginal Publication Date. It hasn't updated in several weeks. The team may have moved on to the next shiny feature for LT.

>13 jonsweitzerlamme: I have the same issue with my “Unknown” books. I also have some that have an assigned Original Publication Date in Common Knowledge but are assigned to the wrong time span in Charts and Graphs, the most egregious being a book published in 1901 that shows up in the 1600-1699 range.

According to this https://www.librarything.com/stats/DuncanHill/share/u30956dc2.uea0aaeb6 I have 18 books which are both fiction and non-fiction. They are listed here https://www.librarything.com/catalog/DuncanHill&collection=-1&genre=67

Now, while I can sort of understand non-fiction works about writers of fiction ending up there, I struggle to see how Fishes: A Guide to European Sea Fishes and Fishing qualifies.

>16 DuncanHill:
Maybe they mean Fishin' and Non-fishin'

I've noticed a discrepancy in the way certain characters are displayed, and I'm not sure whether that's a browser issue on my end.

In the section Graphs > Cataloging > Languages, the character "å" is rendered incorrectly for "Norwegian (bokmål)". This is not the case in the table, where all the accented characters are displayed correctly. Here's a screenshot:



This happens in both Firefox and Chrome.

>18 Petroglyph: Nice catch!

So books over time graphs based on when a book was added to the collection, I understand the reason for this but this means it doesn't go down when you remove books :/

I put some books in a collection called "favorite series" so that I could see what I owned and what I did not own from those series. I went to charts and graphs, series, chose the collection, and then hit the all books button. The picture below is what I got. I think this is objectionable, since the books I have show with no mark, and the books I don't have show with a dot. Why can't this use the checkmark system?

Also, what's up with the All Souls series? There are books with no title? The ones just listed and (1) and (2)? Is there some way that could be cleaned up? This happens in other series as well, such as Chronicles of Narnia but this one shows up in the picture. I don't see anything that could be making this entry when I look at the series page.

>21 al.vick: I see the same thing, weird.

>21 al.vick: Yep - took me a second to figure out that dot mean "don't have it". Kinda the opposite of any other marking in LT...

>21 al.vick: >22 norabelle414: >23 AnnieMod: This is a known issue that is being looked at for this page as well as Characters, Places, and Events.

>24 knerd.knitter: Any ideas about those series that list title-less works? Can that be cleaned up at all? Or were you including that when you said that was a known issue?

>25 al.vick: I'm not sure how that title-less work got attached, but I removed it.

>26 knerd.knitter: Is there anyway for me (or you) to fix other title-less works? There are 20-30 or so across various of my series, and I would do it if I knew how.

>27 al.vick: I made the change in the database because I wasn't sure how widespread it was. Since it's more than just that one, we should probably handle it programmatically. I found a possible fix but will need someone to verify it for me, and I'm afraid it's probably going to be a low priority.

>28 knerd.knitter: Oh wow. I just looked at A Song of Ice and Fire and it looks crazy with all the empty titles.

>28 knerd.knitter:. I think these title-less things show up when a version that is given a number in a series is combined with the main work of that number in the series. I noticed this as I was cleaning up House of Night

>30 al.vick:
Or possibly due to the series combination process?, as I can see that example series has had several combinations done.

>31 Nevov: There weren't any title-less ones in the House of Night until I combined the ones as described. I did not combine 2 series, just 2 works, (twice once for #10, and once for #12).

>32 al.vick: Thanks, sounds like you have it pinned down then.