While doing just what was requested, I noticed the number of blank content titles looks ridiculous at times, we should review such for each type. And tend to reduce rather than expand.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
For an omnibus, i would contract to say, four -- more than that is rare. But for an anthology I would expand to at least 15 -- more than 20 entries in an anthology is not at all uncommon, while reviews and interviews are uncommon in both anthologies and collections -- reduce to 1 each. However I don't find the current one-size-fits-all approach a significant obstacle, so for me this would be a very low priority change. -DES
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Supported on the Community Portal. Group changed to "Approved". Assigned to Bill.
edit/newpub.py 1.3 committed.
While doing just what was requested, I noticed the number of blank content titles looks ridiculous at times, we should review such for each type. And tend to reduce rather than expand.
For an omnibus, i would contract to say, four -- more than that is rare. But for an anthology I would expand to at least 15 -- more than 20 entries in an anthology is not at all uncommon, while reviews and interviews are uncommon in both anthologies and collections -- reduce to 1 each. However I don't find the current one-size-fits-all approach a significant obstacle, so for me this would be a very low priority change. -DES
Implemented in r2009-07.