Post by megamau on Feb 7, 2024 13:22:36 GMT
This is a short essay on what should be included in INDUCKS.
I would be happy if the community chimes in with their views.
The formatted version (with links) is available at:
Google Document: INDUCKS - A manifesto
******************************************
I.N.D.U.C.K.S. - A manifesto
1) Introduction
The I.N.D.U.C.K.S. database of Disney comics is a fantastic resource, used daily by fans, academic researchers and industry experts.
However it lacks a formal document unambiguously specifying the scope of the database. What is supposed to be covered by the database and what is "out of scope" ? This document is an attempt to foster a discussion on this topic.
2) Information from the website
The website at inducks.org/ uses the definition "World-wide database about Disney comics", with no further specification.
The "FAQ" (frequently asked questions) section called “Bolderbast” does not offer additional clarity. It focuses on technical aspects of indexing such as syntax of entries and file types.
The same is true for the license page, which focuses on legal terms and rights of use.
We will attempt to analyze the description "World-wide database about Disney comics" in detail, focusing on each element.
3) "World-wide"
This is the least controversial item in the definition. The database covers items written/drawn/published anywhere in the world. This global approach has no limitations, as long as humans don't colonize other planets and start publishing there.
4) Database
I.N.D.U.C.K.S. is an organized collection of structured information, or data, stored electronically in a computer system. This matches the definition of the word “Database”.
However there is some ambiguity on which data is collected in the database. For example in the FAQ site, it is mentioned that images are excluded from the database, but they are hosted from the same internet domain “inducks.org”.
On a more technical note, it is not clear what constitutes the I.N.D.U.C.K.S database:
The collection of *.DB* text files which is fed to Dizni
The collection of *.ISV files which is generated by Dizni
The SQL database that is created from *.ISV files
The collection of *.PHP file which constitute the COA website
The first 3 items have restricted access, while the fourth has public access.
5) “About”
It might seem silly to discuss prepositions. However it is worth noting that the definition of a database about Disney comics differs from the definition of a database of Disney comics.
I.N.D.U.C.K.S. is not a database of Disney comics, because digital copies of the actual comics are not allowed.
“About” implies the inclusion of meta-items such as commentaries, votes, biographies of authors, rarity status, collection status, commercial valuations, etc.
It becomes even more important to clearly define the scope, which currently seems to be:
“Authorship info, publication data and characters appearances” in the *.ISV files
“Votes, scans, collection data, authors data” in the COA website
6) Disney
This is by far the most ambiguous word in the definition. To realize it, it’s sufficient to navigate the extensive disambiguation page at Disney (disambiguation) - Wikipedia. “Disney” is both a family name and an abbreviation representing a multinational conglomerate company. It is quite clear that I.N.D.U.C.K.S. refers to the company but there are still multiple possibilities.
6A) Relation to Disney
How should the comics be related to “The Walt Disney Company” ?
Does just the parent company count, or any of the subsidiaries or also partially participated companies ?
Moreover should the comics be:
Distributed by Disney ?
Produced by Disney directly ?
Produced by Disney under license from another company ?
Produced by anyone under license from Disney ?
Containing intellectual property (IP) owned by Disney, regardless of legal status ?
Included in a publication published by Disney, regardless of IP owner ?
6B) Time frame
In the continuously changing world of corporations, what should be the timeframe of the connection to “The Walt Disney Company” ?
Should the relation refer to the present and be continuously updated ?
Should the relation refer to the publication date ?
Should the relation refer to the creation date ?
6C) Example of edge cases
These are some edge cases based on the two points 6A and 6B above
Marvel Comics is presently owned by Disney. Including all Marvel comics in I.N.D.U.C.K.S. would probably increase the database by at least 50%
After the closure of Bongo Comics, I believe Titan Magazines publishes “The Simpson” comics under license from Disney. Does this make them “Disney Comics” ?
Monster Allergy is written and drawn by Italian authors who do most of their work for Disney. In Italy the series is distributed by “Disney Italia”. However it is currently excluded.
“Gargoyles” and “Haunted Mansion” comics are currently in I.N.D.U.C.K.S..
“Illegal” unlicensed Chinese comics using Donald Duck and Mickey Mouse are currently in I.N.D.U.C.K.S. (卡通连环画选 # 6), however unofficial fanzines with similar levels of art are not included.
What would happen if Disney was to spin-off Pixar and sell it to a competitor ? Would all the relevant comics be removed from I.N.D.U.C.K.S. ?
7) “Comics”
This is probably the most interesting definition for Disney Comics fans. What are Comics ? What distinguishes them from other art and entertainment forms such as small paintings, art prints, illustrated novels, political cartoons, collectible cards, etc. ?
This Wikipedia page has a good introduction, but it concludes that there is no consensus.
Inclusion in the “comics” category seems to be a case of “I know it when I see it”, similar to obscenity.
7A) Name in other languages
The etymological study of the category name does not help us.
The English term derives from the humorous (or "comic") work of early American newspaper strips, but usage of the term currently includes dramatic / adventurous and other works.
The Portuguese term (quadrinhos) focuses attention on the organization of the art, in regular square panels. However the layout is mostly irregular the modern super-heroistic comics (including Disney ones, like PKNA / Duck Avenger)
The French term (bandes dessinées) also mentions the layout (strips), but more importantly restricts the field to “drawn” art, excluding photo novels (like the italian fotoromanzo). The I.N.D.U.C.K.S. policy is unclear, excluding “Disney Cinestory”, but including this.
The Italian term (fumetti) implies the presence of “balloons” with text attributed to the characters. However many of the early comics don’t have this characteristic, including this famous Topolino story.
The Japanese term (manga) is the widest, meaning “whimsical picture”, and indeed in Japan it is used to describe illustrations which would not normally be considered comics in the west.
7B) Attempt at definition of “Comics”
A comic is a work of narrative fiction consisting of multiple texts and multiple illustrations. The sequence of the texts and illustrations is instrumental in conveying the story and can’t be changed without impacting the narration. Neither the texts alone nor the illustrations alone are able to convey the story.
This would include most of what is commonly considered “Comics”, while excluding illustrated book with short stories, art books or similar publications.
However it would also exclude mute gags, or stories like Faccini's famous “silent” works. Other suggestions for the definition are welcome.
8) Not included in the description
There are other aspects that are not touched upon in the sentence “World-wide database about Disney Comics”. For example:
Publishing status: does the comics have to be professionally published or are amateur strips allowed ?
Medium: only printed paper comics or also webcomics ?
9) Conclusion
Given all the above, there is no clear definition of what the scope of I.N.D.U.C.K.S. should be. The intention of the author is to seek community feedback and drive the effort toward a formal definition.
Maurizio De Leo
7-Feb-2024
I would be happy if the community chimes in with their views.
The formatted version (with links) is available at:
Google Document: INDUCKS - A manifesto
******************************************
I.N.D.U.C.K.S. - A manifesto
1) Introduction
The I.N.D.U.C.K.S. database of Disney comics is a fantastic resource, used daily by fans, academic researchers and industry experts.
However it lacks a formal document unambiguously specifying the scope of the database. What is supposed to be covered by the database and what is "out of scope" ? This document is an attempt to foster a discussion on this topic.
2) Information from the website
The website at inducks.org/ uses the definition "World-wide database about Disney comics", with no further specification.
The "FAQ" (frequently asked questions) section called “Bolderbast” does not offer additional clarity. It focuses on technical aspects of indexing such as syntax of entries and file types.
The same is true for the license page, which focuses on legal terms and rights of use.
We will attempt to analyze the description "World-wide database about Disney comics" in detail, focusing on each element.
3) "World-wide"
This is the least controversial item in the definition. The database covers items written/drawn/published anywhere in the world. This global approach has no limitations, as long as humans don't colonize other planets and start publishing there.
4) Database
I.N.D.U.C.K.S. is an organized collection of structured information, or data, stored electronically in a computer system. This matches the definition of the word “Database”.
However there is some ambiguity on which data is collected in the database. For example in the FAQ site, it is mentioned that images are excluded from the database, but they are hosted from the same internet domain “inducks.org”.
On a more technical note, it is not clear what constitutes the I.N.D.U.C.K.S database:
The collection of *.DB* text files which is fed to Dizni
The collection of *.ISV files which is generated by Dizni
The SQL database that is created from *.ISV files
The collection of *.PHP file which constitute the COA website
The first 3 items have restricted access, while the fourth has public access.
5) “About”
It might seem silly to discuss prepositions. However it is worth noting that the definition of a database about Disney comics differs from the definition of a database of Disney comics.
I.N.D.U.C.K.S. is not a database of Disney comics, because digital copies of the actual comics are not allowed.
“About” implies the inclusion of meta-items such as commentaries, votes, biographies of authors, rarity status, collection status, commercial valuations, etc.
It becomes even more important to clearly define the scope, which currently seems to be:
“Authorship info, publication data and characters appearances” in the *.ISV files
“Votes, scans, collection data, authors data” in the COA website
6) Disney
This is by far the most ambiguous word in the definition. To realize it, it’s sufficient to navigate the extensive disambiguation page at Disney (disambiguation) - Wikipedia. “Disney” is both a family name and an abbreviation representing a multinational conglomerate company. It is quite clear that I.N.D.U.C.K.S. refers to the company but there are still multiple possibilities.
6A) Relation to Disney
How should the comics be related to “The Walt Disney Company” ?
Does just the parent company count, or any of the subsidiaries or also partially participated companies ?
Moreover should the comics be:
Distributed by Disney ?
Produced by Disney directly ?
Produced by Disney under license from another company ?
Produced by anyone under license from Disney ?
Containing intellectual property (IP) owned by Disney, regardless of legal status ?
Included in a publication published by Disney, regardless of IP owner ?
6B) Time frame
In the continuously changing world of corporations, what should be the timeframe of the connection to “The Walt Disney Company” ?
Should the relation refer to the present and be continuously updated ?
Should the relation refer to the publication date ?
Should the relation refer to the creation date ?
6C) Example of edge cases
These are some edge cases based on the two points 6A and 6B above
Marvel Comics is presently owned by Disney. Including all Marvel comics in I.N.D.U.C.K.S. would probably increase the database by at least 50%
After the closure of Bongo Comics, I believe Titan Magazines publishes “The Simpson” comics under license from Disney. Does this make them “Disney Comics” ?
Monster Allergy is written and drawn by Italian authors who do most of their work for Disney. In Italy the series is distributed by “Disney Italia”. However it is currently excluded.
“Gargoyles” and “Haunted Mansion” comics are currently in I.N.D.U.C.K.S..
“Illegal” unlicensed Chinese comics using Donald Duck and Mickey Mouse are currently in I.N.D.U.C.K.S. (卡通连环画选 # 6), however unofficial fanzines with similar levels of art are not included.
What would happen if Disney was to spin-off Pixar and sell it to a competitor ? Would all the relevant comics be removed from I.N.D.U.C.K.S. ?
7) “Comics”
This is probably the most interesting definition for Disney Comics fans. What are Comics ? What distinguishes them from other art and entertainment forms such as small paintings, art prints, illustrated novels, political cartoons, collectible cards, etc. ?
This Wikipedia page has a good introduction, but it concludes that there is no consensus.
Inclusion in the “comics” category seems to be a case of “I know it when I see it”, similar to obscenity.
7A) Name in other languages
The etymological study of the category name does not help us.
The English term derives from the humorous (or "comic") work of early American newspaper strips, but usage of the term currently includes dramatic / adventurous and other works.
The Portuguese term (quadrinhos) focuses attention on the organization of the art, in regular square panels. However the layout is mostly irregular the modern super-heroistic comics (including Disney ones, like PKNA / Duck Avenger)
The French term (bandes dessinées) also mentions the layout (strips), but more importantly restricts the field to “drawn” art, excluding photo novels (like the italian fotoromanzo). The I.N.D.U.C.K.S. policy is unclear, excluding “Disney Cinestory”, but including this.
The Italian term (fumetti) implies the presence of “balloons” with text attributed to the characters. However many of the early comics don’t have this characteristic, including this famous Topolino story.
The Japanese term (manga) is the widest, meaning “whimsical picture”, and indeed in Japan it is used to describe illustrations which would not normally be considered comics in the west.
7B) Attempt at definition of “Comics”
A comic is a work of narrative fiction consisting of multiple texts and multiple illustrations. The sequence of the texts and illustrations is instrumental in conveying the story and can’t be changed without impacting the narration. Neither the texts alone nor the illustrations alone are able to convey the story.
This would include most of what is commonly considered “Comics”, while excluding illustrated book with short stories, art books or similar publications.
However it would also exclude mute gags, or stories like Faccini's famous “silent” works. Other suggestions for the definition are welcome.
8) Not included in the description
There are other aspects that are not touched upon in the sentence “World-wide database about Disney Comics”. For example:
Publishing status: does the comics have to be professionally published or are amateur strips allowed ?
Medium: only printed paper comics or also webcomics ?
9) Conclusion
Given all the above, there is no clear definition of what the scope of I.N.D.U.C.K.S. should be. The intention of the author is to seek community feedback and drive the effort toward a formal definition.
Maurizio De Leo
7-Feb-2024