UESPWiki:Archive/CP Tamriel:Books

As the Tamriel:Books section receives very little, and even then, infrequent attention, I thought it best to recommend my idea for an overhaul of said section here - on the Community Portal - as opposed to the Tamriel Books discussion page. I do this not only to garner greater feedback, but also to guarantee myself more immediate feedback, as (should a favorable consensus arise) I would like to get started on this right away. For those reasons, I ask that this topic not be moved to said talk page. Thank you.

Now, that much aside, I would like to - as noted above - suggest an overhaul of the Tamriel:Books section to conform to a new style. I have recently spent a few hours filling in the blank descriptions and missing/incorrect authors, however, I could not help but feel that the very manner in which the information was displayed prevented me from creating a more content-laden article; thus, in accordance with the Content Over Style policy, I would like to propose that the pages be redone from their current state, like so... 

...to something like this... 

But a few of the benefits of such a layout are as follows:
Whole titles may be displayed, not cramped within a table bracket (for instance, ''Interviews With Tapestrists, Volume XVIII: Cherim's Heart of Anequina may be listed in whole, as opposed to its current state listed not under I as it should be, but under C and the title of Cherims Heart of Anequina'').
No more columns with but a single heading. The data is always clearly appended its proper title (Author=___ and so on, not a mere name in a box).
Room would be granted to write a more thorough description, when and if necessary.
The inclusion of a graphic image to capture the eye, create a more stylisticly pleasing page, and inform the reader of what the book appears as in-game.
I currently retain the texture files for every book cover in both Morrowind and Oblivion (ripped direct in their proper resolutions from the .bsa files), and can create the books at any angle deemed appropriate (as I did those above).
That's it. So, what do you think? -- Booyah boy 09:41, 4 September 2006 (EDT)

:I am in favour of exploring a new format for the book listings, and in particular agree that it would be useful to find a format that works well with longer book descriptions.  However, I'm not sure about all the details of your suggested format.
:*For consistency with the rest of the site, I don't think a different font should be used for the books.
:*Graphics do make the page more visually appealing, but I'm not sure that a picture of the book cover is important enough to be as large as the entire book description.  Perhaps a smaller graphic would be more appropriate.
:*I'm not sure why the new format needs to be so narrow: why not use more of the available width of the page?
:*I don't understand your comment about a book being listed under 'C' instead of 'I': that is not imposed by the format; it is just a matter of where someone inserted that book.  Also, I believe that when the inventory name from a book differs from the book's full name (i.e., as listed on the book's first page), the book should be listed under its inventory name.  Most readers are going to first look for the book under the name that they see listed in the inventory.  In cases where there are significant differences, a redirect from the full name may be appropriate.
:*If we are going to set up a new format, I would like to also discuss a way to include information such as whether the book is a skill book (for which skill, and in which game, if there are differences between games).  Also, there are some books which differ between games; there should perhaps be some way set up to provide that information where appropriate.
:--Nephele 12:28, 4 September 2006 (EDT)

::My apologies mate, but I'm afraid you took to my example rather literally.
::First, I am not suggesting that a different font be used at all. I merely wrote with the default font in my version of Photoshop (Tahoma). That it is not the exact font used herein is the simple result of the graphic above being an example only, not a definite layout.
::Second, The narrowness was also a result of the graphic being only an example (that is, I randomly cropped an 800x600 canvas and then wrote in a size fourteen font; that it overlapped is the result of such...my suggestion is to see that no such overlap occurs, as long strings of text are currently forced to do in the table format).
::Third, the comment about "C" and "I" was merely to emphasize the point that full names are not listed, and was - like the image above - an example only.
::Fourth, the idea of whether or not a book provided skills also crossed my mind, however, as I am referring strictly to the Tamriel:Books section, I did not believe it necessary to include such information in that library. After all, the Tamriel section is more a lore area, as opposed to gameplay related. Still, there is nothing to prevent another line being appended stating which attribute is affected by reading the book.
::That much aside, thanks for your input. -- 12:38, 4 September 2006 (EDT)

:::I don't mind it.  I think you'll run into some problems, as I know from experience that there are several books in Morrowind that always appear opened, never closed, so you'll have to fake those graphics. Plus, what will you do about books from earlier games?  Or books which have a different appearance in multiple games?  (Many books are found in Daggerfall, Morrowind, and Oblivion, and use different graphics each time.)  Plus, the graphics of a book are hardly identifying, because there's only about a dozen different book graphics in each game which are re-used over hundreds of books, so there will be many duplicates.  As for the format, it is a tad bulky - might be better if you did the same thing only using two columns.  Otherwise, some of the pages will get quite long.  As for skill books, it's a bit iffy, because there are some books which appear in multiple games that are skill books in one game, and not the other, or possibly teach a different skill in one than the other.  (Not sure on that, but there are several fewer skills in Oblivion than there were in Morrowind, so it's a possibility.)  You'd have to come up with a concise way of dealing with that.  Otherwise, I'm all in favor of a change.  Just you might have your work cut out for you... --TheRealLurlock 12:52, 4 September 2006 (EDT)

: I like this idea, but there's one fatal flaw in it: How are the other editors who have no skills in image design, like me, going to edit the list? --Aristeo 12:47, 4 September 2006 (EDT)

: I don't think that's a problem.  There's a rather limited number of actual book graphics (maybe a dozen or so per game), so once somebody uploads all of them, you just need to link to the proper one and have it display.  No graphics skills necessary. --TheRealLurlock 12:54, 4 September 2006 (EDT)

:: He's talking about replacing the lists at  with images, not uploading the book graphics. --Aristeo 14:17, 4 September 2006 (EDT)

:::I believe, Aristeo, that is what TheRealLurlock meant, and in saying so he is quite correct. For instance, in Morrowind (without mods) there exist only sixteen unique covers of closed books, sixteen unique textures for open books, five unique closed scroll textures, five unique open scroll textures, three unique note images, and roughly ten unique parchment textures (with varying sizes). If you would like to see them all I can upload them here in a moment.
:::Now, as to your points...
:::(LURLOCK) ''I think you'll run into some problems, as I know from experience that there are several books in Morrowind that always appear opened, never closed, so you'll have to fake those graphics.
:::(Response) True. Still, for some of the books the correct cover texture may be discerned from the border of the "open-book" texture, whilst others are quite simple to make (I actually created a mod with extra book jackets once, so I could always rustle some of those up if necessary). Furthermore, if it becomes necessary (or a consensus on such should be reached) I can see no reason not to include open-book images as well.
:::(LURLOCK) Plus, what will you do about books from earlier games?''
:::(Response) Include them, naturally. If necessary I can do my best to update the textures while retaining the original appearance, and, if all else fails, a slight difference in appearance shouldn't make too much of an esthetic affrontry.
:::(LURLOCK) Or books which have a different appearance in multiple games?  (Many books are found in Daggerfall, Morrowind, and Oblivion, and use different graphics each time.)
:::(Response) I was actually thinking of creating a sort of montage of books for them, with the later books overlaid by the newer in a fan-like fashion...you know, like when you spread a deck of cards out.
:::(LURLOCK) ''Plus, the graphics of a book are hardly identifying, because there's only about a dozen different book graphics in each game which are re-used over hundreds of books, so there will be many duplicates.
:::(Response) True, however they are identifying in that they are never randomized. The same book will have the same appearance every time you play, thus you know that the image displayed here at the UESP (should it be) will be the same found in-game.
:::(LURLOCK) As for the format, it is a tad bulky - might be better if you did the same thing only using two columns.  Otherwise, some of the pages will get quite long.
:::(Response) Again, quite true (especially once more of the Oblivion books/journals/logs/whatnot are added), however, I cannot foresee that posing too much of a difficulty. Stylisticly, it might even be a better choice to create a double-columned page...
:::(LURLOCK) As for skill books, it's a bit iffy, because there are some books which appear in multiple games that are skill books in one game, and not the other, or possibly teach a different skill in one than the other.  (Not sure on that, but there are several fewer skills in Oblivion than there were in Morrowind, so it's a possibility.)  You'd have to come up with a concise way of dealing with that.
::: (Response) Well, that's opening up a whole new can of worms (I just wanted to say that)...that is, I was thinking of revising the layout for the books content as well. As is, many of the content pages contain unecessary coding (HTML in the form of breaks and the like) that is frivilous on a wiki. As such, I thought it might be best if the contents were presented in the center of the article (with slight margins on each side) and any notes (such as the skill granted in each game) would be appended at the bottom...or perhaps at the top of the page in a small box that could be shown/hidden at will (much like a table of contents).
:::(ARISTEO) How are the other editors who have no skills in image design, like me, going to edit the list?
:::(Response) By linking to the appropriate graphic. As there are a limited amount of images for each book (open and closed) I should be able to throw them all together in a relatively short amount of time. Considering I do retain all the texture files from Morrowind and Oblivion (ripped from the .bsa files, and thus, I have the images necessary to create icons like those above at any angle or size desired), and can probably throw together any from Arena and Daggerfall in a matter of weeks, I can't see that it should pose any problem if you or any other editor lacks the necessary skill or software to render the images on your own.
:::-- Booyah boy 15:07, 4 September 2006 (EDT)

: I would pefer a table style as it is more clear to read and faster accessible than your list, however i understand the reasons behind the points 2-3 (1 is imho not important). I think there should be no more colums added to the existing table (perhapes one or two should be removed, but which ?). Those and the closer information are imho nothing for a overview page but for the specific book's page itself. Also, except for the font, your layout including the book's cover image, is something i find very pretty. What do you think of making a info box in this style to put it on each book's page. I find the overview table pages fitting very well their purpuse, but the book pages lack of both content (information) and style. -- The Nerevarine 12:17, 5 September 2006 (EDT)
:: I just spent some time looking at the current table format, and it's definitely got some internal formatting problems.  For example, the narrow empty column at the left used to be for an ID code, which didn't get fully removed.  Based on The Nerevarine's comments, I thought I'd put together an alternative table format, at .  This addresses some of the points raised in this discussion: it allows for longer title names, and longer descriptions.  And if implemented as a template it would be possible to make it more intelligent than the current template (i.e., alternate titles possible, skip the description box if empty).  I thought I'd throw this into the mix, as a possibility of what a redesigned table format could provide. --Nephele 13:29, 5 September 2006 (EDT)
::: On the other hand, having that ID code might be information people would want.  However, FormIDs are unique to Oblivion.  Morrowind used a different form of reference similar to the Editor Names in the Oblivion CS.  Not sure about Daggerfall, but I'd imagine it (and anything prior) is similar to Morrowind.  I know the skill books on  have the IDs listed, but none of the others do.  Though perhaps that means that Oblivion:Books needs changing, rather than Tamriel:Books.  --TheRealLurlock 13:48, 5 September 2006 (EDT)
::::I'd vote for including the FormID on each book's page, rather than on the overview page.  I'd guess it's something most readers don't need to know at first glance, and with the potential for a different FormID/Editor Name in each game, it could become unwieldy to include the information in the overview.  It's could be added fairly easily to the "Book Info" template (although that template is currently missing from alot of the book pages...). --Nephele 14:24, 5 September 2006 (EDT)
:: That table format looks definately cleaner than the existing, what do you think of altering the background shading of even and odd entries? -- The Nerevarine 16:23, 5 September 2006 (EDT)
:I like the new style Booyah boy is proposing and I prefer it rather than a table. I find it brings style to a new level in the wiki and deserves much consideration.
:As for the IDs and skills, I believe they are valuable informantion, but they belong to the game pages, i.e.  or , not . --DrPhoton 15:24, 5 September 2006 (EDT)

::(NEREVARINE) I would pefer a table style as it is more clear to read and faster accessible than your list
::I'm afraid I can't see how that is true. While a table may be able to contain a small amount of information in a more concise format, it in no wise is the clearest manner of displaying information; for instance, on tables that span more than a single page-length, the title of each column becomes lost; a new format - such as I suggested - leaves the category of information the user is consulting always at hand (that is, Author: X, Found in: X, etcetera). Furthermore, a table would not necessarily be any faster to read, as doing so entails scrolling down the table to find the correct title, then reading the data from the proper column; the format I suggested would have the same result: scroll down to find the proper book title, then read the data.
::The fact is, one of the primary reasons for proposing the new format is to move away from using a table (thanks for the support on that one, DrPhoton). The fact is, tables are one of the most commonly employed means of displaying large amounts of information on this site, and while I have nothing against them, certainly that doesn't mean they are the only thing that should be used...right?
::Furthermore, making use of the images side-by-side with the listed information would create - hopefully - a feeling somewhat akin to perusing an online library (just one more thing I was going for, after all, it is listed on the Tamriel page as the "Library"; see the New York Public Library's online catalog for a look at what I mean), with the books content only a mouse-click away. Rather like checking out a book, in its own way. -- Booyah boy 17:03, 5 September 2006 (EDT)
::: I think we have here a different understanding what the books table/list page should be for. If i understand you right, you see that page for giving the user the informations he looks for on a book, i see the use of that page in giving the user the information to quickly identify the book he wants information about and lead him to the books page where he can get the information he wants about that book. As we cant't get all information about the listed books on that page without making it unaccessible, why split the information between those on that page and those on the book's page? That would imho only confuse users which look for complete information and reduce accessibility of the table/list page. On the otherhand we would have a "quick find - click - get all info" situation. On that page we could have a info box, preferable in that very pleasing style you proposed, so users who want only a short overview about the book and not read trough lengthly text, and the more detaild description, pages images, etc. for those who wand in deep information without giving up accessibility to that informations. -- The Nerevarine 19:33, 7 September 2006 (EDT)
:::::Hmmm...not quite what I meant, Nerevarine. Still, your comments have merit, and I would like to thank you for continuing to give them.
:::::That much aside, I am working on a few mock-ups in a sandbox (or two) to better illustrate my suggestion. I should have them up soon.
:::::Oh, also, I would appreciate some feedback as regards changing the book content pages to look like this. I believe this suggestion has merit, primarily as the box and background color help define the book's content, and the table at the bottom allows the reader to garner all non-content related data in a swift glimpse. Comments? Criticism?
::::: -- Booyah boy 10:16, 12 September 2006 (EDT)
::::::Looks fine to me. I'd maybe put the table thing at the top as some books are quite long. It could perhaps have the book graphic to the left of the table for further identification purposes. I definitely like the new-look listing idea, although adding skills to the listings might also be useful. Since the images are somewhat useful for visual identification ingame, open books shouldn't be shown closed. As for the angle it should probably be the same as the Morrowind inventory icons. Garrett  19:44, 12 September 2006 (EDT)
:::::::Great! Thanks for chiming in Garrett.
:::::::I'll take a moment (some time this evening) and draw up a separate page with the skills included as well, just to see what it looks like. As to open books, no worries, I have already created all of the open books (and their closed version) and even entertained an idea of animated books that would open and close with a mouse-over or click (that would, of course, require the use of Flash images, however, I do not have the time to create such at the moment...nor am I even aware if swf files can be uploaded here; can they?). My apologies for the digression, the point being that I do have the open book images, and they will be used when appropriate, all at the proper angle (hopefully). -- Booyah boy 13:37, 13 September 2006 (EDT)

Some random comments.
I think with the new format for individual books that you're suggesting, having the information box at the top of the page would be more useful.
I do like the idea of having a box that explicitly states the different inventory names in the different games.  I've been putting notes about some of that info onto the book pages in the last couple of days (not that I think my notes are a better way to do it, just wanted to post the info in some form as I figure it out).
In addition any change in format should allow for additional comments that may be to be added.  For example, comparisons between Daggerfall and Morrowind/Oblivion versions of books (e.g., ), or errors that editors have fixed (e.g., ).
--Nephele 17:03, 16 September 2006 (EDT)

:I'll move the info-box to the top of the sandbox page I'm using as a format template at the moment to see what it looks like and link it back here later.
:As to your third point, what did you have in mind?
:That much aside, I do apologize for the delayed response; I am still battling some rather ill-health at the moment and have not been able to stay on the computer as long as I would like. -- Booyah boy 01:22, 18 September 2006 (EDT)

:I just spent some time making the King Edward books into a single-page transclude, like the other multi-volume books.  I ran into your re-hash of Book IX of that series, and opted to leave it alone for the time being, but we need to come up with some means of making the two work together.  Yours looks nice, but it's missing a few things that should be added to make it consistant with the other volumes.  I'll let you do what you want with this, just the page looks kind of weird right now with just one chapter using a different format than the rest... --TheRealLurlock 13:55, 18 September 2006 (EDT)

::Might I inquire as to why you did such? I didn't see a problem with the books being separate articles. Still, what's done is done.
::On a more relevant note - to your post, at least - might I ask what the format I posted is "missing...that should be added to make it consistant with the other volumes"? I'll add whatever it is in, then revise all of the pages to reflect such (the format was made to separate the content from the info-box, as well as giving me an excuse to proofread certain pages, such as the noted King Edward title, that was a mess). -- Booyah boy 20:52, 20 September 2006 (EDT)

:::As the person who's been doing most of the work on the multi-volume books, I figured I'd chime with a response to your question on that subject.  The way I've been doing the multi-volume books, they can now either be accessed as individual volumes, or as the entire book.  So if you just want to pull up King Edward, part IX, it's still there.  But in many cases, it is more convenient to just be able to refer to the entire set of books as one.  For example, on , it is much more concise to just have a single link to King Edward, than have ten separate links to each of the individual books.  If someone wanted to write a page about Barenziah, it is much easier to just refer the readers to The Real Barenziah for more information, than to have to provide readers with a list of all ten individual volumes.  And I'm guessing many readers would prefer to just pull up the whole book and read it as one continuous book, rather than having to follow links from one to the next.  So overall I think having pages that unify the multi-volume books is a very useful feature.  --Nephele 21:19, 20 September 2006 (EDT)

::::''"The way I've been doing the multi-volume books, they can now either be accessed as individual volumes, or as the entire book."
::::Wonderful! I have no problem with the pages being merged then, as the only thing inciting trepidation on my part was the fear that the ability to access a single'' book at a time would be lost. Thanks for clarifying that, Nephele. -- Booyah boy 11:02, 21 September 2006 (EDT)