Difference between revisions of "Talk:Osho Books on CD-ROM"

From The Sannyas Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
m
 
Line 11: Line 11:
 
I think pages like [[Osho Media International Limited, Ireland]] are too much out of the way, they are very specific.
 
I think pages like [[Osho Media International Limited, Ireland]] are too much out of the way, they are very specific.
  
I was rather thinking of a sister-page to [[Editing of Osho's words]], like [[Availability of Osho's words]].  That can also be linked to from [[:Category:English Publications]].
+
I was rather thinking of a sister-page to [[Editing of sources]], like [[Availability of Osho's words]].  That can also be linked to from [[:Category:English Publications]].
  
There we can talk about the fact that much of Osho's words are not in print, where to find second hand books (like in the very good ISBN set-up). And of course about the texts on osho.com / oshoworld.com / the CD-ROM / Audio & video tapes / mp3s / mp4s etc etc. (Some parts of [[Editing of Osho's words]] can go there too.)  --[[User:Sugit|Sugit]] ([[User talk:Sugit|talk]]) 07:46, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
+
There we can talk about the fact that much of Osho's words are not in print, where to find second hand books (like in the very good ISBN set-up). And of course about the texts on osho.com / oshoworld.com / the CD-ROM / Audio & video tapes / mp3s / mp4s etc etc. (Some parts of [[Editing of sources]] can go there too.)  --[[User:Sugit|Sugit]] ([[User talk:Sugit|talk]]) 07:46, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
 
----
 
----
 
oh yes, much better.--[[User:Rudra|Rudra]] ([[User talk:Rudra|talk]]) 16:23, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
 
oh yes, much better.--[[User:Rudra|Rudra]] ([[User talk:Rudra|talk]]) 16:23, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 09:40, 4 December 2019

On the main page there was under availability this sentence:

Since 2015, a subset of appr. 200 of Osho's books can be searched and read on the OIF website free of charge. It is quite likely that more editing has been applied to the original Osho talks. The OIF online library is not meant to be used as a means to read Osho's books in a normal relaxed way and is constantly interrupted by prompts to discourage any kind of machine reading.

I have removed this as it is not about the CD-ROM. Maybe it should go somewhere else? --Sugit (talk) 07:42, 25 March 2017 (UTC)


yes, i just noticed this edit. i love your sense of precision. joy can come from the most unlikely places, even from a far away forgotten corner of a huge wiki ;)

we could put the OIF info into their publisher/company page ? note that all OIFs websites incl the library are run by Osho Media International Limited, Ireland --Rudra (talk) 17:11, 25 March 2017 (UTC)


I think pages like Osho Media International Limited, Ireland are too much out of the way, they are very specific.

I was rather thinking of a sister-page to Editing of sources, like Availability of Osho's words. That can also be linked to from Category:English Publications.

There we can talk about the fact that much of Osho's words are not in print, where to find second hand books (like in the very good ISBN set-up). And of course about the texts on osho.com / oshoworld.com / the CD-ROM / Audio & video tapes / mp3s / mp4s etc etc. (Some parts of Editing of sources can go there too.) --Sugit (talk) 07:46, 26 March 2017 (UTC)


oh yes, much better.--Rudra (talk) 16:23, 26 March 2017 (UTC)


Hey, Sugit!

Bliss: Living Beyond Happiness and Misery available under title The Great Path. So it needs to remove this title from Missing on CD-ROM. --DhyanAntar 06:34, 28 May 2017 (UTC)


Thanks! Done that. --Sugit (talk) 06:46, 28 May 2017 (UTC)


Corrected a link of A Bird on the Wing to Roots and Wings. --DhyanAntar 14:09, 31 May 2017 (UTC)


swapped A Bird on the Wing to Roots and Wings alltogether because what is on the CD-ROM is really Roots and Wings. --Rudra (talk) 03:18, 1 June 2017 (UTC)



Why is there no section editing for this page? Lots of needless scrolling! -- doofus-9 17:11, 1 January 2018 (UTC)


probably because we use the "book" template which looks like it breaks section editing.--Rudra (talk) 14:45, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Okay, then there are two ways to go. The "simple" way is to not use the book template. The more complicated but ultimately more satisfying way would be to fix the book template so that it allows section editing. That "breaks section editing" was introduced to deal with a problem in the template but it may not have been the ideal way, since with longish book pages -- and this is not the only one -- section editing would be handy. The problem it was trying to address was almost like a systemic glitch, whereby section editing appeared to be enabled but clicking on the purported "edit" link led to editing the "editions" sub-template itself. Surely there must be another way to deal with that and still allow section editing? -- doofus-9 16:11, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

As i understand in the errata section should not include all inconsistencies in dates and Archival Codes?

Here is an example, CD-ROM say in "Where are the Gandhians", ch.1: July 19th 1969 pm, Archive Code 0000000.

I can leave the similar passes only for a spreadsheet in the field comments. Would you like to fit these omissions for wiki too, or not?--DhyanAntar 14:19, 2 January 2018 (UTC)


How many of these inconsistencies are there? If not many, they could have a subsection of "errata". If many, their own section or page. It could all be in a table either way though and be clear at a glance that it is a special sub-topic. -- doofus-9 16:11, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

---

At the moment i find which are not yet in Wiki:

Case No.1: Archive Code has an year, and a date is empty at all - 54chapters.
Case No.2: Archive Code has also an month, and a date is empty at all - 10ch.
Case No.3: Archive Code is completed, and a date is empty - 4ch. (likely 3 of them have unknown month and dates. 6700000-6700020)
Case No.4: Archive Code is 0000000, and a date is empty - 2ch.
Case No.5: Archive Code doesn't corresponds to a date of a discourse - 41 cases.

They belong 22 books. I'd suggest to include to this page and after (if necessary) we can move them to better places. --DhyanAntar 18:08, 2 January 2018 (UTC)


Among the English media files, and apart from the 15 incorrect dates of The Eternal Quest, I have 18 corrections of CD-ROM-ArchiveCodes. --Sugit (talk) 09:49, 5 January 2018 (UTC)


I have some technical details of the CD-ROM, I'm not sure if they are useful here, it maybe helps if someone needs to check what version they have of the thing:

CD Version 1
File dates: 7 Aug 1994
odd.nfo date: 9 Aug 1994 or 6 Jan 1995
odd.nfo size: 107,143,168
MD5: ad70e413ab3717362518eafc3e167f27
CD Version 1.01
Label date: June 1994
File dates: 7 Aug 1994
odd.nfo date: 24 Feb 1995
odd.nfo size: 107,241,472
CD Version 2
Label date:
File dates: 21 Apr 1995
odd.nfo date: 21 Apr 1995
odd.nfo site: 99,811,328
CD Version 2.x
Label date:
File dates: 21 Apr 1995
odd.nfo date: 8 Aug 1995
odd.nfo size: 99,999,744
MD5: 54c0c9ab1fe5c19e9f7455b145844b20

--Jalal (talk) 17:50, 25 June 2019 (UTC)


Thanks Jalal, this may be useful for someone, somehow. Maybe we can put it on the main page with the different editions.

But let's check if we are talking about the same versions :

  • Version 1: what is this "odd.nfo date: 9 Aug 1994 or 6 Jan 1995", so two dates?
  • Version 1.01: you say "Label date: June 1994". What date is this exactly? Because afaik on that V.1.01 (for us the main version as it is the most complete), when looking IN Folioview it says "December 1994", so that is what we wrote as the edition date.
  • You say there is a Version 2 and one (or more?) Version 2.x. Can you tell the story about this? So far I only heard about that one V.2.0, and on the CD-ROM label it says "April 1995".

--Sugit (talk) 18:48, 25 June 2019 (UTC)


Ah, good questions.

  • Label date -- this is the date that was written on the CD label of the original production. Most copies wouldn't have this...
  • File dates -- this is the date stamp of the files on the CD itself, it relates to the version of Folio Views that was used.
  • odd.nfo date/size -- this is the actual data file containing all the books and indexes. It is on the CD and also as installed. The file date relates to when it was compiled (or created) from all the base texts. The size/MD5-sum are a way of identifying it uniquely.
  • Versioning:
    • V1 -- this was a first attempt, some things didn't work correctly. It was never produced beyond a few copies for checking. Two dates because it was attempted twice.
    • V1.01 -- the main version. About a dozen copies were produced and distributed to each of the audio/video archive holders
    • V2 -- with all the unpublished stuff removed. About a dozen copies made and offered to the archive holders as an 'upgrade' upon return of the V1.01 they had received. Some did, some didn't...
    • V2.x -- memory is vague, but I think this was a slightly improved version that was never completed or published. I just have the one copy.

--Jalal (talk) 09:40, 26 June 2019 (UTC)


OK great.

  • Do you have the MD5 hashes of the other two files?
  • Can you confirm that odd.nfo size: 107,143,168 is identical for odd.nfo date: 9 Aug 1994 AND 6 Jan 1995 ?
  • Do you want to be identifiable as the source of this info? If not, then we will erase the above once we have copied the info to the main page.
  • I have added all the info th the main page, please have a critical look.

--Sugit (talk) 14:40, 26 June 2019 (UTC)


Yo sugit

  • I've added the missing hashes to the page
  • Yes, the file sizes are the same
  • No problem with identifying me as the source. I've got a lot more info to add when I have time.
  • The page is getting a little crowded, maybe break some of it out to a sub-page???

--Jalal (talk) 09:29, 27 June 2019 (UTC)


All super. Yes, it's a long page, but it has a nice TOC at the top, so I think no problem.

I vaguely remember that years ago I tried to seduce you with wiki-questions, but you didn't have time. Would now be a good moment to unearth those questions? --Sugit (talk) 09:58, 27 June 2019 (UTC)


go for it, i have (some) time and energy... --Jalal (talk) 13:52, 27 June 2019 (UTC)