Post Reply
If you were logged in you would gain 3 XP for posting a reply.
You are replying to:
Support Nibbits by linking to us:
Your
StarCraft Resource
More from Nibbits: WarCraft 3 Maps | StarCraft Maps | StarCraft 2 Maps | Gamer Configs
Contact | Advertising | About | Pending Changes from Users | Become an Affiliate | Database Statistics | Terms of Use | Twitter | API Documentation
I am describing different types of "based off" relation now:
-1.0 Two map files are similar, have the same file size but differ *only* by system filename. In this case I say the first file is the *clone* of the second. Obviuosly if one file is the clone of another then the other file is the clone of the first one, therefore this is an *equivalency* relation, which divides all maps on non-overlapping equivalence classes. Everything (except probably similarity) up to this point could be checked automatically by the discovery engine. A similarity in the simple case of two files with the same size is simple, it is just byte comparison of two files.
One particular file should be chosen from each class (by human in case the class contains more than one map) as a *representative*, others should be marked ("reported") as having "inappropriate filename" and thus not appear in the search results. Almost all assosiated content (name, description, authors, votes, labels, comments and threads) except only discovery date, downloads, and thus achievements should be shared between all maps from one class. When someone wants to download a non-representative map file an appropriate notification should appear to prevent spread of map clones. Each clone should contain link to the representative (or to all other maps in his equivalence class in case there is no representative). The representative should contain links to all his clones and moreover this probably should be *the only* way to reach his clones.
-2.0 Two map files are similar, one file differs from the other by the author field in the way the set of the authors of one file does not include and not equal to the authors set of the other file and vice versa. This is the case when editors of the initial map don't give credits to authors of the original work. Though we dont know which file is the *original*, we do definetly know there is something wrong and one of them is the original. So this is an equivalence relation too and such maps should also be connected together in an equivalence class like in the point 1.0. There should be links from each map of the equivalence class to all other maps of the class. The inclusion of the authors sets could easily be checked by the engine when both sets are provided.
-2.1 Unlike from the point 1, maps found in an equivalence class from the point 2.0 are not *equivalent*. We just dont know what map file is the original yet. One can make this yet equivalence relation more exact by specifying the original(s). In case of disputes the editing of this particular "credits" relation could be locked until the final decision is made. Generally having an ability to lock the *particular* wiki-like field of the map in case of disputes seems to be usefull.
When the original is determined, links pointing to the original from the other maps of an equivalence class from the point 2.0 should be marked in one way (to obtain justice), links from the original to his modified copies in another way (to make Otaku108 proud :p), and links between still undecided maps should not be marked like just all other links from the point 2.0.
-3.0 Two map files are similar, but we have inclusion of provided sets of the authors. This happens when the map file was modified. In case the inclusion is strict, after determining maps are similar, we can determine which map is the original automatically. In case sets of authors are equal these maps could be placed in one equivalence class until someone (most likely the author) specifies the original. Also a place for the list of modifications could be provided.
-4.0 The authour could specify maps where he has borrowed the idea of his work. By saying "the author" I imply everyone could change this field but most likely only the author knows this for sure.
Probably others I cant think of at the moment...