Green check marks for books contained in omnibus editions

This suggestion has been touched on by others in the past, but I have been perusing site improvement topics for over an hour and I can not see any comments or 'official' responses as to why green check marks are still not shown against books contained in, and shown as 'contains', in omnibus editions.

So I suggest this as a site improvement, and wonder why not already instigated, ie is it too hard to do? Is it deemed not a good idea? Is it a planned improvement, but just way down the priority list?

There is a reason, but I wonder what it is, as it continues to frustrate me, seeing lists of books with no green ticks against books that I have.

There's this conversation https://www.librarything.com/topic/172783

And this tells you what the current different coloured ticks are for https://wiki.librarything.com/index.php/Template:Checkmarks (since I can never remember what they're for or where to find the definition).

(Speaking of... it would be nice to have that definition on series pages) :0)

I understand not using a green tick for a book you don't physically have but I do completely agree with you that it would be nice to have a tick of some colour for books that are contained within omnibus editions.

As a completist, I want to have every book in a series, or at least my favourite series but sometimes they are not published in order (eg Vorkosigan series, Liaden series) within omnibus So it would make it really useful when I'm in a bookshop (with limited time, cranky kids and juggling handsful of books) to be able to see at a glance which books I already have on my shelves, be they individual copies or within omnibus editions.

Mostly I think because the whole editions/contained in project never really came to a conclusion. There's some progress but not enough to be definitively sure.

I circumvent it by creating a collection (contained in omnibii) and try to remember to add the constituent works to it when purchasing an omnibus. As with everything on LT it's a bit of effort to keep it properly in order.

I would say no. You may have some story (or essay) that is contained is some other collection. But you don't have that work. (Having said that, it would be helpful if LT was a bit smarter about recognizing these things)

Anthologies are tricky.

>6 Nicole_VanK:

Absolutely - and don't get me started on those people who add an anthology to about half a dozen or more unconnected series from various writers.

Generally I think a mark would be fine in principle. However I think it needs to be very distinct looking, a different icon, from the current tick. It would also need limiting to the contains/contained-in relationship for work-to-work relationships.

I'm not sure where you've been looking, but the answer is that the contains/contained in relationship is totally incomplete and not really used for anything. The answer to why *that* is the case is that's just how things work here - a feature will be released in an early version and then forgotten. Work on LT has, for all practical purposes, stopped; serious bugs do get addressed, but you shouldn't expect any future improvements.

>8 lorax: The contains/contained in relationship does act as a block in combining (along with all other relationships), which is super helpful. But yeah, it could be leveraged for more.

I like this idea: https://www.librarything.com/topic/109753#2512900 (i.e. green circle instead of tick-in-circle).

Since we are talking about the coloured ticks, I'd like to see the priority order (see >2 humouress:) reversed. Currently, wish-list and read but unowned take priority over books you actually own. So if I've marked a book as wish listed or RBUO and then purchase it but don't remove it from those lists (and I would like to continue to keep a record of my RBUO books) the tick for that book in a series list will remain blue (or purple) rather than green. And if I'm in a bookshop trying to remember where in that series I've got up to, I'm going to end up purchasing more than one copy of the same book.

Sigh. I have wanted this for many a year. I too am a completest and want to know which books I Don't own in a series. At the moment if a book is contained in an anthology/collection
it ain't obvious.

The Phantom of the Opera and Other Gothic Tales seems an excellent example. With that in our library, there are numerous separate Works we might move on, and others we might never acquire (except in a really delightful edition, such as illustrated by Quentin Blake, Edward Gorey, Barry Moser, Mervyn Peake, Arthur Rackham, or Maurice Sendak). As it is, I’m unsure how to tell that we’ve now got The Castle of Otranto, H.P. Lovecraft's "The Rats in the Walls," or The Great God Pan in that anthology.

>12 jasbro: you should complete the contains/contained in links, so that when (IF) this is ever completed, those checks will appear.

Yes, even if this gets implemented, it will only work if the work-to-work relationships are filled in.

At the very least, even now, if that were filled in, you would have a place to check what you have in that anthology.

>13 gilroy:, >14 MarthaJeanne: I'm doing them as I can, but we're blessed with more anthologies than I can fully catalog in a short space of time. Plus, not all the contents are listed seperately as Works on LT; e.g., Mary Shelley's story, "The Transformation" (not Frankenstein as I had incorrectly recallled) apparently appears as the title of one or more anthologies, but not (yet) as a Work in its own right.

>11 guido47: Bump

Bump

Bump

Bump as more people ask for ways to see they already own something, albeit in an omnibus or an anthology

bump