OK, thanks.
I think it largely comes down to what “same module”/“same game” will be taken to mean. For the sake of the argument, and what I would advocate, is “same module”/“same game” corresponds to the BGG division. I will call this a game here.
Aside:
If the API of BGG is open, then the GLS database could contain a field that references the BGG game identifier, and meta information about the game could be retrieved using that API. This would add the benefit that the GLS can get complexity (BGG lingo “weight”) ratings, and so on. Of course, it creates a tight link between the VASSAL GLS and BGG.
OK, so with that assumption, I would say that each game should be presented to the user. Thus, when a user searches for Afrika Korps then a single entry will be shown that has all “Afrika Korps” projects in a single page. When a user searches for D-Day, then the user will see three pages
- D-Day
- D-Day (3rd ed.)
- D-Day - Smithsonian
A-side:
Searching for D-Day does not currently work - the dash (-) is somehow interpreted as an option on the server-side, which indicates a possible arbitrary code execution on the server.
If the user clicks a project, then the user might be taken to a separate page for that project which could contain more information. This would probably necessitate that each project has both a summary (shown on the game page) and description (shown on project page) field.
In some sense, the question is if the user will do a game or a project search. Both could be possible of course.
A-side:
The current sort order of search results is a bit funny. If you search for Afrika Korps - with the correct German spelling and a complete match - the first entry returned is North Africa:Afrika Korps vs Desert Rats, 1940-42 - even if the sort order is set to Relevance. An even worse example is searching for Battle of the Bulge.
Presenting a single page with a list of projects for each game will also allow auxiliary stuff to be posted as a separate (non-module) project.
Other question:
- How are new game and project entries created? Are these done by the administrators, or will it be open to users?
- Who will be allowed to edit game stuff? Clearly, project developers can edit their stuff, but what about a level up?
OK, which I think is best dealt with with a single game page.
Perhaps game entries should not only have a description field but also a summary field that could be shown on a search.
I think you, as administrators, have to come up with a policy. I think it goes back the to understanding of “same module”/“same game”. If you adopt the same division as BGG - as argued above, then developers will need to attach their project to a game. I think this is what you, Joel, recently also argued for in another thread. Of course,this does not need to be rigorously enforced, but there should be good arguments for doing something different. But I think it begs a number of questions like who can do what and so on.
Thanks again.
Yours,
Christian