Greg Strong wrote on Tue, Apr 26, 2005 12:39 PM UTC:
I was not envisioning this new submission system automatically formatting
the text into the CVP template; that would be a lot of work to program,
and the standard outline, 'overview', 'rules', 'equipment', etc, is
probably not flexible enough to accomodate the wide assortment of games
being submitted. It might be nice to expirement with someday, though ...
For a first version, I would do this:
The first page takes basic database information about the game (name,
one-line description, number of ranks, number of files, number of cells,
...). At this point I would have the database search, and reject the name
if it is a duplicate of the name of an existing game (including both games
already public and games still pending review.) If all information has
been entered and there are no conflicts with existing games, then it
creates a sub-directory for it under the temp directory and instructs the
user to FTP upload the HTML page and any images to which it refers into
the newly created directory and click 'OK' when finished. When the user
clicks OK, he is given the URL to the newly uploaded page, and asked
whether to proceed with the submission or upload again (in case there was
a problem.) When the user indicates he is ready to proceed, an
email is sent to the editors notifying them of the new submission (and
giving them the URL.) The editor then uses a PHP page to accept or
reject. If accepted, the editor specifies the category of the game
('large variant', 'historical variant', etc.) and the program will
then move the game's directory to the appropriate permanent location. If
rejected, the editor types a description of what is wrong, and the user is
notified, and can FTP up improved versions. I would suggest the editors
NOT fix mistakes in the submissions; reject them with explaination and
make the users fix them. This way the people who submit games get good at
it, (after a little practice,) and it would require very little time of the
editors.
I was not envisioning this new submission system automatically formatting the text into the CVP template; that would be a lot of work to program, and the standard outline, 'overview', 'rules', 'equipment', etc, is probably not flexible enough to accomodate the wide assortment of games being submitted. It might be nice to expirement with someday, though ... For a first version, I would do this: The first page takes basic database information about the game (name, one-line description, number of ranks, number of files, number of cells, ...). At this point I would have the database search, and reject the name if it is a duplicate of the name of an existing game (including both games already public and games still pending review.) If all information has been entered and there are no conflicts with existing games, then it creates a sub-directory for it under the temp directory and instructs the user to FTP upload the HTML page and any images to which it refers into the newly created directory and click 'OK' when finished. When the user clicks OK, he is given the URL to the newly uploaded page, and asked whether to proceed with the submission or upload again (in case there was a problem.) When the user indicates he is ready to proceed, an email is sent to the editors notifying them of the new submission (and giving them the URL.) The editor then uses a PHP page to accept or reject. If accepted, the editor specifies the category of the game ('large variant', 'historical variant', etc.) and the program will then move the game's directory to the appropriate permanent location. If rejected, the editor types a description of what is wrong, and the user is notified, and can FTP up improved versions. I would suggest the editors NOT fix mistakes in the submissions; reject them with explaination and make the users fix them. This way the people who submit games get good at it, (after a little practice,) and it would require very little time of the editors.