I think those who are looking for such items would probably search for round
before circular - although I don't think circular is necessarily wrong here.
I think those who are looking for such items would probably search for round
before circular - although I don't think circular is necessarily wrong here.
And then there are terms like ovoid which normally refer to 3D shapes but are
used here to describe the 2D oval shape of shields. Like everything else, you
learn the language BL uses and just stick with it if you want to search.
Like everything else, you learn the language BL uses and just stick with it if you want to search.
Easy to say when it's your language
It could be easier for the others to reduce a bit the vocabulary, sticking to
Round because it's an already used/existing word, and get rid of all Circular.
Like everything else, you learn the language BL uses and just stick with it if you want to search.
Easy to say when it's your language
It could be easier for the others to reduce a bit the vocabulary, sticking to
Round because it's an already used/existing word, and get rid of all Circular.
My 2 rounded cents.
Even that can cause difficulty for non-native (and native) speakers. For example,
rounded is different to round. Round is usually used to mean circular (or spherical)
whereas rounded usually means curved but not necessarily circular or spherical.
And of course round could be 2D or 3D whereas circular and spherical are 2D only
and 3D only, respectively. And the 'round brick' is not really round
but cylindrical unless the round name refers only to the 2D cross section. But
on bricklink cylinder refers to many things that are not cylinders, but doesn't
refer to the cylindrical brick ...
So even if the words come from your first language, you still have to learn how
BL uses them. Although we took many words from Latin and Greek, some direct and
some via French, and often changed their meaning from a little to a lot.
Like everything else, you learn the language BL uses and just stick with it if you want to search.
Easy to say when it's your language
It could be easier for the others to reduce a bit the vocabulary, sticking to
Round because it's an already used/existing word, and get rid of all Circular.
My 2 rounded cents.
Even that can cause difficulty for non-native (and native) speakers. For example,
rounded is different to round. Round is usually used to mean circular (or spherical)
whereas rounded usually means curved but not necessarily circular or spherical.
And of course round could be 2D or 3D whereas circular and spherical are 2D only
and 3D only, respectively. And the 'round brick' is not really round
but cylindrical unless the round name refers only to the 2D cross section. But
on bricklink cylinder refers to many things that are not cylinders, but doesn't
refer to the cylindrical brick ...
Tile Circular 1x1 - please have mercy.
OK I see, no problemo for me.
So even if the words come from your first language, you still have to learn how
BL uses them. Although we took many words from Latin and Greek, some direct and
some via French, and often changed their meaning from a little to a lot.
Like "flirt", from "conter fleurette" (talking about little flowers?),
and since then we now we all say "flirt" or its french verb "flirter"
[…]
i have a feeling this joke dosnet transfer to english
Voilà. On a qu'à faire une circulaire?
There you go. We just have to make a circular?
Peux pas. Je ne suis ni ministre ni évêque
Can't. I'm neither a minister nor a bishop
As a noun, “une circulaire” in French is a circulating letter, sent by
the boss to all their underlings.
It’s simply a memo. But, nowadays, we use “mémo” or “note de service” when it’s
in a firm or limited to a department and “circulaire” is mostly only used for
when a minister explains to “their” civil servants how to apply a new law, or
change of procedure, or what is important to them, etc. So the meaning is closer
to decree or instructions.
And it comes from Latin, and bishops have ministries (in more than one meaning).
[…]
i have a feeling this joke dosnet transfer to english
Voilà. On a qu'à faire une circulaire?
There you go. We just have to make a circular?
Peux pas. Je ne suis ni ministre ni évêque
Can't. I'm neither a minister nor a bishop
As a noun, “une circulaire” in French is a circulating letter, sent by
the boss to all their underlings.
It’s simply a memo. But, nowadays, we use “mémo” or “note de service” when it’s
in a firm or limited to a department and “circulaire” is mostly only used for
when a minister explains to “their” civil servants how to apply a new law, or
change of procedure, or what is important to them, etc. So the meaning is closer
to decree or instructions.
And it comes from Latin, and bishops have ministries (in more than one meaning).
As a noun, “une circulaire” in French is a circulating letter, sent by the boss to all their underlings.
In English, the word circular can also be used as a noun with a similar
meaning to une circulaire in French, although this is not very common:
circular (noun): a paper (such as a leaflet) intended for wide distribution
Yes, the origins are the same but the meaning in English leaned towards the innocuous
while it went to the more serious in French (in France, not in Québec).
And then there are terms like ovoid which normally refer to 3D shapes but are
used here to describe the 2D oval shape of shields. Like everything else, you
learn the language BL uses and just stick with it if you want to search.
Or you buy a magnifier light. I HAVE to have one to do what I do, so it is handy
for this. If the first thing I look for doesn't work, but read the part
number.
Agreed Round would be better as an adjective here?
As adjectives the difference between circular and round is that circular is
of or relating to a circle while round is shape.
The wikidiff link is a bit confusing and not very helpful.
Round and circular have roughly the same meaning (to me anyway),
the only difference being that round is a bit more general. Shapes such as ovals
and ellipses can be described as round but not circular.
I'm not sure the distinction is relevant here because all of the items on
the search results page infinibrix linked to are also circular. Perhaps they
suggested the change to fit with the language used elsewhere in the BrickLink
catalog, such as the Brick, Round, Plate, Round, and Tile, Round
categories under parts.
Rounded can be used either as an adjective with roughly the same meaning
as round or as the past tense of the verb round meaning to make round.
Agreed Round would be better as an adjective here?
As adjectives the difference between circular and round is that circular is
of or relating to a circle while round is shape.
The wikidiff link is a bit confusing and not very helpful.
Round and circular have roughly the same meaning (to me anyway),
the only difference being that round is a bit more general. Shapes such as ovals
and ellipses can be described as round but not circular.
I'm not sure the distinction is relevant here because all of the items on
the search results page infinibrix linked to are also circular. Perhaps they
suggested the change to fit with the language used elsewhere in the BrickLink
catalog, such as the Brick, Round, Plate, Round, and Tile, Round
categories under parts.
^this, which I do agree with.
Why saying the shield is circular while the (perfectly) circular Tile is round?
It would simplify the searches. IMO.
Rounded can be used either as an adjective with roughly the same meaning
as round or as the past tense of the verb round meaning to make round.
Thank you Sir, but we've already SylvainLS to help us.
BTW you're very welcome back in forum!
Round doesn't even look like a word anymore…
I'm lost; that must be a circular definition I don't understand.
Why saying the shield is circular while the (perfectly) circular Tile is round?
Some of the things in "Tile, Round" are NOT circular and what would be
enormously confusing would be having separate categories for round tiles and
specifically circular ones.
Why saying the shield is circular while the (perfectly) circular Tile is round?
Some of the things in "Tile, Round" are NOT circular and what would be
enormously confusing would be having separate categories for round tiles and
specifically circular ones.
Understood. So many, erm the majority should be Rounded, not Round?
Oh my gosh.
Circular because they are in the shape of a circle instead of an oval, ellipse,
egg-shape, etc. that are also all "round".
So, the Earth isn't circular?
I don't see how you took that from what he said.
Yes, it is circular. I used to think, "well it is actually pretty jagged"
and then I saw a meme that said all the mountains and canyons on Earth are within
the tolerance allowed for a billiard ball. I checked on that and it wasn't
exactly true. But it it is close. When you consider that the radius is 3963
miles, a variance from 5.5 miles above sea level at the top of Everest to 6.8
miles below in the Mariana Trench, the variance is only 0.3%. You can't
draw a circle that good.
Circular because they are in the shape of a circle instead of an oval, ellipse,
egg-shape, etc. that are also all "round".
So, the Earth isn't circular?
I don't see how you took that from what he said.
Because we say the Earth is round.
Never heard the Earth is circular! AT least not in french (both same adjectives
in french: ronde / circulaire).
Yes, it is circular. I used to think, "well it is actually pretty jagged"
and then I saw a meme that said all the mountains and canyons on Earth are within
the tolerance allowed for a billiard ball. I checked on that and it wasn't
exactly true. But it it is close. When you consider that the radius is 3963
miles, a variance from 5.5 miles above sea level at the top of Everest to 6.8
miles below in the Mariana Trench, the variance is only 0.3%.
Oh that's interesting numbers, and fun image the billiard ball tolerance,
thanks!
I've to find what's their tolerance, but I'd guess lower.
Ah but there's also this centrifugal deformation (source National Geographics):
Earth's diameter at the Equator is about 12,756 kilometers (7,926 miles).
At the poles, the diameter is about 12,714 kilometers (7,900 miles). Earth's
equatorial bulge is about 43 kilometers (27 miles).
Yes, it is circular. I used to think, "well it is actually pretty jagged"
and then I saw a meme that said all the mountains and canyons on Earth are within
the tolerance allowed for a billiard ball. I checked on that and it wasn't
exactly true. But it it is close. When you consider that the radius is 3963
miles, a variance from 5.5 miles above sea level at the top of Everest to 6.8
miles below in the Mariana Trench, the variance is only 0.3%.
Oh that's interesting numbers, and fun image the billiard ball tolerance,
thanks!
I've to find what's their tolerance, but I'd guess lower.
The celestial body that I’ve heard compared to a billiard ball is Europe (Jupiter’s
moon).
It’s the smoothest celestial body we know, it’s smoother than the smoothest billiard
ball we can make.
And it’s forbidden to us….
Based on some of the responses here and different arguments going off on a tangent
perhaps I should have elaborated on why I felt Round made more sense than circular
though I honestly thought most would share the same thought process so didn't
feel the need?
But my reasoning is because this would be the weapon/shields most commonly used
descriptive name
"They we're wielding Axes and Round Shields" NOT "They we're
wielding Blades on poles and Circular shields"
The fact that 'Round Shield' has a wikipedia and 'Circular Shield'
doesn't should tell you enough about which is the most appropriate and commonly
used descriptive term to use:-
I couldn't find the shield on first attempt or second attempt in fact I had
to search "Shield stud" and that only helped me because I already know
a little bit more about the descriptive terms used here but that won't help
newcomers who will almost certainly search round shield before anything else!
Based on some of the responses here and different arguments going off on a tangent
perhaps I should have elaborated on why I felt Round made more sense than circular
though I honestly thought most would share the same thought process so didn't
feel the need?
But my reasoning is because this would be the weapon/shields most commonly used
descriptive name
"They we're wielding Axes and Round Shields" NOT "They we're
wielding Blades on poles and Circular shields"
The fact that 'Round Shield' has a wikipedia and 'Circular Shield'
doesn't should tell you enough about which is the most appropriate and commonly
used descriptive term to use:-
Yes, this: I'm sure few would first search for "circular shield".
Based on some of the responses here and different arguments going off on a tangent
perhaps I should have elaborated on why I felt Round made more sense than circular
though I honestly thought most would share the same thought process so didn't
feel the need?
But my reasoning is because this would be the weapon/shields most commonly used
descriptive name
"They we're wielding Axes and Round Shields" NOT "They we're
wielding Blades on poles and Circular shields"
The fact that 'Round Shield' has a wikipedia and 'Circular Shield'
doesn't should tell you enough about which is the most appropriate and commonly
used descriptive term to use:-
I couldn't find the shield on first attempt or second attempt in fact I had
to search "Shield stud" and that only helped me because I already know
a little bit more about the descriptive terms used here but that won't help
newcomers who will almost certainly search round shield before anything else!
Setting wikipedia aside (try to never use it) I agree with your take; round
is the more apt descriptive. Don't believe I would've even thought to
use the term "circular" in any case.
Setting wikipedia aside (try to never use it) I agree with your take; round
is the more apt descriptive. Don't believe I would've even thought to
use the term "circular" in any case.
As there is a long history of using circular as the descriptive name for such
shields on BL, I know to use circular as the search term when trying to identify
a part number.
There is also another bonus of the current name, as 'round' is in the
part type name for many parts, a search for round shield also brings those up
too if they have a shield decoration on them. So changing the name would either
give more parts to look through, or requires more filters such as the part type
to narrow down the search.
But, of course, adding "round" doesn't mess up the current name and
strategies to search efficiently.
Setting wikipedia aside (try to never use it) I agree with your take; round
is the more apt descriptive. Don't believe I would've even thought to
use the term "circular" in any case.
As there is a long history of using circular as the descriptive name for such
shields on BL, I know to use circular as the search term when trying to identify
a part number.
There is also another bonus of the current name, as 'round' is in the
part type name for many parts, a search for round shield also brings those up
too if they have a shield decoration on them. So changing the name would either
give more parts to look through, or requires more filters such as the part type
to narrow down the search.
But, of course, adding "round" doesn't mess up the current name and
strategies to search efficiently.
Ah yeah, the soon famous Circular Round Shield.
Sehr elegant
Anyway, I can hear Timothy Smith saying "Catalog is just arbitrary and capricious"
Setting wikipedia aside (try to never use it) I agree with your take; round
is the more apt descriptive. Don't believe I would've even thought to
use the term "circular" in any case.
As there is a long history of using circular as the descriptive name for such
shields on BL, I know to use circular as the search term when trying to identify
a part number.
There is also another bonus of the current name, as 'round' is in the
part type name for many parts, a search for round shield also brings those up
too if they have a shield decoration on them. So changing the name would either
give more parts to look through, or requires more filters such as the part type
to narrow down the search.
But, of course, adding "round" doesn't mess up the current name and
strategies to search efficiently.
Well I remember locating those shields with the term round and not too long ago
either besides the catalog needs to work best for all which means novices/experienced
alike and Nobody, I repeat nobody is going to think to use circular without knowing
in advance and therefore your argument about a few other items getting thrown
up in the search results with round is a minor concern in comparison
Setting wikipedia aside (try to never use it) I agree with your take; round
is the more apt descriptive. Don't believe I would've even thought to
use the term "circular" in any case.
As there is a long history of using circular as the descriptive name for such
shields on BL, I know to use circular as the search term when trying to identify
a part number.
There is also another bonus of the current name, as 'round' is in the
part type name for many parts, a search for round shield also brings those up
too if they have a shield decoration on them. So changing the name would either
give more parts to look through, or requires more filters such as the part type
to narrow down the search.
But, of course, adding "round" doesn't mess up the current name and
strategies to search efficiently.
Well I remember locating those shields with the term round and not too long ago
Many of these shields have never had the term "round" in them. Some did,
but they were all standardized at some point.
either besides the catalog needs to work best for all which means novices/experienced
The catalog will never work best for "all". It will work best for most,
and that is hopefully what we strive for. Someone, somewhere is always going
to want something different from somebody else.
alike and Nobody, I repeat nobody is going to think to use circular without knowing
You asked every single member of BrickLink? Now that is some dutiful research.
Seriously, though, I think it more likely that "circular" would be the
term found to be used less overall.
in advance and therefore your argument about a few other items getting thrown
up in the search results with round is a minor concern in comparison
All concerns are important. One concern not being considered with your request
is that the term "circular" has been in use for a long time on some of
these parts, so changing them will mean relearning for many others who use the
current search terms.
Cheers,
Randy
P.S. Once again, this is something that could be solved with tags. But here we
are approaching another end of year without a tag system in sight that has been
talked about for so many years now I can't remember when it was initially
suggested.
Seriously, though, I think it more likely that "circular" would be the
term found to be used less overall.
I think the opposite. I imagine "circular" is the term that would be
used more overall when searching for them on BL, for the simple reason that it
is the term used to describe them. If a user searches for a round shield then
they pick up 23 fairly random parts, including torsos, printed tiles, duplo,
etc and realise that round is not the word they need. Then they use circular
shield (or maybe circ* shield) and find it. And the next time they search for
a similar shield, they might remember the correct BL term for it and use circular
shield. They can either keep using the wrong term and get nowhere, or learn the
term that is used. And eventually circular is the term that most people use when
searching for them.
I find that is the case for many parts and other terms such as colours. Bricklink
uses many words and spellings I normally wouldn't use. But I use them here
and especially when searching as I can usually remember which words Bricklink
uses for them even though I might typically call them something else.
[…]
I imagine "circular" is the term that would be used more overall when searching for them on BL
And all this could be easily solved if BL made a few stats on searches.
Google does.
Apparently 95% of US has searched for Round Shield.
Insensitive case.
All stats are on 5 last years scope.
Approx same results for simply "Circular" and "Round".
[…]
I imagine "circular" is the term that would be used more overall when searching for them on BL
And all this could be easily solved if BL made a few stats on searches.
Would stats really be useful though? Would someone keep searching for something
using the wrong name when they know it will fail? Wouldn't they learn (eventually)
to use the name BL uses?
It is like if someone wants to buy a Technic beam, they come here and type beam
but find that the only beams for sale here are from Duplo, scala, znap, etc.
But no technic beams as that term is not used here. Even though LEGO calls them
beams, and has a section of their catalogue called Technic Beams, and just about
every AFOL at LUGs and shows will refer to beams, as they are also called at
rebrickable, brickowl, etc. Yet here they have a different name that must be
known to search for them by name. So I imagine that there are more searches here
for liftarms than for beams, not because BL users prefer to call them liftarms
but because BL calls them liftarms and so users know to use that language rather
than using the term beam as they know that term is not used. The site still functions
despite not using the most common term. But if they are suddenly changed to beam,
then there will be confusion as the language used for them for years has changed.
Eventually it will settle as users get to know the new language, unless bricklink
thinks they made a mistake and changes them back. It doesn't really matter
too much what they are named, so long as the term used is consistent across parts
and isn't frequently changed.
[…]
I imagine "circular" is the term that would be used more overall when searching for them on BL
And all this could be easily solved if BL made a few stats on searches.
Would stats really be useful though? Would someone keep searching for something
using the wrong name when they know it will fail? Wouldn't they learn (eventually)
to use the name BL uses?
OP's not talking about rewording everything, just 20+ items on what 100,000?
Apparently you know it, but I wouldn't search for circular for a shield.
And anyway who cares, in 5 years everybody will use his cam to search for a part,
after 2025 where BrickLink will acquire Brickognize and BrickStore.
And 2025 end of the year, an AI engine you can say "it's a shield I guess
not squared but like a regular oval, not an ellipse" boom it'll give
"Circular Shield". AI are smart.
OP's not talking about rewording everything, just 20+ items on what 100,000?
That isn't really the wider point. There are many items that could be better
named especially for new users, but presumably won't be as they have a history
of being called something else at BL and the removal of search terms leads to
confusion (but addition of extra terms is fine).
Apparently you know it, but I wouldn't search for circular for a shield.
What if you had already done it before, would you keep searching for round shield
even though you know that doesn't work and you had previously (after maybe
a couple of tries) had success with circular shield? That is the wider point,
people learn from failures and tend not to continue making the same mistakes
once they know the answer. But if the answer gets changed, they have to learn
again.
OP's not talking about rewording everything, just 20+ items on what 100,000?
That isn't really the wider point. There are many items that could be better
named especially for new users, but presumably won't be as they have a history
of being called something else at BL and the removal of search terms leads to
confusion (but addition of extra terms is fine).
As I already said, Round Shield already was a search term for the shields I searched
for but now it isn't so what's the difference? besides I'd rather
make changes for the long term benefit than stick to what we already have just
because its always been that way even though in this instance it hasn't always
been that way?
Apparently you know it, but I wouldn't search for circular for a shield.
What if you had already done it before, would you keep searching for round shield
even though you know that doesn't work and you had previously (after maybe
a couple of tries) had success with circular shield? That is the wider point,
people learn from failures and tend not to continue making the same mistakes
once they know the answer. But if the answer gets changed, they have to learn
again.
Yes and why is that such a big deal? You make the change, they fail to find it
and they quickly learn how to find it again. however making it simpler for the
majority of people in the long term should be the big aim here rather than sticking
to old ways for old ways sake!
[…]
I imagine "circular" is the term that would be used more overall when searching for them on BL
And all this could be easily solved if BL made a few stats on searches.
Would stats really be useful though? Would someone keep searching for something
using the wrong name when they know it will fail? Wouldn't they learn (eventually)
to use the name BL uses?
OP's not talking about rewording everything, just 20+ items on what 100,000?
Apparently you know it, but I wouldn't search for circular for a shield.
And anyway who cares, in 5 years everybody will use his cam to search for a part,
after 2025 where BrickLink will acquire Brickognize and BrickStore.
And 2025 end of the year, an AI engine you can say "it's a shield I guess
not squared but like a regular oval, not an ellipse" boom it'll give
"Circular Shield". AI are smart.
So, who cares the name
There will still be names, but I also agree that the future of this hobby is
part identification based on image capture. With the massive growth of this product,
eventually identifying minifigure heads, legs, and torsos as well as things like
stickered counterparts will be difficult at best to almost impossible with just
words alone. Even using the color page to start a search will be tedious. And
if the technology works for those things, then it will work for shields no matter
what they are called. Maybe we will just name them all "Sylvain" with
a number behind them.
AFOL #1: Whatcha thinking of buying on BrickLink today?
AFOL #2: I was hoping to score a bunch of Sylvain 186s for a MOC I am working
on.
AFOL #1: Nice! I sure like the shape of those! Question... Would you say they
are more 'round' or 'circular'?
There will still be names, but I also agree that the future of this hobby is
part identification based on image capture. With the massive growth of this product,
eventually identifying minifigure heads, legs, and torsos as well as things like
stickered counterparts will be difficult at best to almost impossible with just
words alone. Even using the color page to start a search will be tedious. And
if the technology works for those things, then it will work for shields no matter
what they are called. Maybe we will just name them all "Sylvain" with
a number behind them.
Isn't that pretty much what LEGO already do themselves. They have, for example,
"Shield, No. 36" and "Mini Upper Part , No. 6954" and so on.
As we don't have tags, I don't see why names are not just filled up with
as many keywords as necessary that fit. To me, the point of the name is twofold:
(i) to help find an item and (ii) to help distinguish it from similar items.
So where two keywords are useful, just add them both if they fit. "Shield
Round / Circular" or even removing the slash for "Shield Round Circular".
People that search for a round shield are happy. People that search for circular
shield are happy.
So what if the name sounds a bit strange, its primary job is to help describe
it to find/distinguish it. The only people that are unhappy are those that think
BL is forcing them to call it a Round Circular Shield.
There will still be names, but I also agree that the future of this hobby is
part identification based on image capture. With the massive growth of this product,
eventually identifying minifigure heads, legs, and torsos as well as things like
stickered counterparts will be difficult at best to almost impossible with just
words alone. Even using the color page to start a search will be tedious. And
if the technology works for those things, then it will work for shields no matter
what they are called. Maybe we will just name them all "Sylvain" with
a number behind them.
Isn't that pretty much what LEGO already do themselves. They have, for example,
"Shield, No. 36" and "Mini Upper Part , No. 6954" and so on.
As we don't have tags, I don't see why names are not just filled up with
as many keywords as necessary that fit. To me, the point of the name is twofold:
(i) to help find an item and (ii) to help distinguish it from similar items.
So where two keywords are useful, just add them both if they fit. "Shield
Round / Circular" or even removing the slash for "Shield Round Circular".
Don't remember to add "Disk".
And what else, let me find a thesaurus...
People that search for a round shield are happy. People that search for circular
shield are happy.
See my stats and other who have said people would mostly search for round shield
or shield round.
But it's OK, as said also, AI and optical recognition will make soon the
whole concept of naming/tagging system simply obsolete.
In this case and as said Randy, we can name them "Sylvain" with a number
behind them, it won't matter!
Well, for starters, they would, if not prevent, at least answer “I think / believe
/ imagine” arguments
Would someone keep searching for something using the wrong name when they know it will fail?
People aren’t rational, and people aren’t the best to judge what they do themselves.
Search stats would tell us what people who already are on BL do. Not what they
think or would prefer.
Another way would be polls. And that’s a bit what this thread is because polls’ll
only be answered by a handful of persons who have strong opinions.
(For the difference between stats and polls, see TV: according to polls, everybody
wants to watch instructional documentaries, according to stats, not at all.)
Wouldn't they learn (eventually) to use the name BL uses? […]
Making things difficult like demanding that people learn is not very welcoming.
There sure isn’t any intuitive interface (even babies sometimes need to be taught
how to suckle), but there’s a whole world out there and doing things in contradiction
to what is done outside needs to be backed by compelling arguments.
The historic/legacy argument sometimes is compelling. Sometimes, it’s just,
well, old farts being adverse to change (or worse, old farts feeling cheated
that it was harder “in their time”).
On the issue at hand, I find “circular” a bit weird and would prefer “round.”
On the “beam” issue, yes, I’m one of those who find it annoying that BL is the
only one to use “liftarm,” and using “beam” (at least adding it for a long transition
period) wouldn’t shock me (litotes).
But then, I rarely use a general search on the website when I don’t have an ID.
I’m usually already in the correct category and I’m generally using Studio to
search for it visually.
[…]
I imagine "circular" is the term that would be used more overall when searching for them on BL
And all this could be easily solved if BL made a few stats on searches.
Would stats really be useful though? Would someone keep searching for something
using the wrong name when they know it will fail? Wouldn't they learn (eventually)
to use the name BL uses?
It is like if someone wants to buy a Technic beam, they come here and type beam
but find that the only beams for sale here are from Duplo, scala, znap, etc.
But no technic beams as that term is not used here. Even though LEGO calls them
beams, and has a section of their catalogue called Technic Beams, and just about
every AFOL at LUGs and shows will refer to beams, as they are also called at
rebrickable, brickowl, etc. Yet here they have a different name that must be
known to search for them by name. So I imagine that there are more searches here
for liftarms than for beams, not because BL users prefer to call them liftarms
but because BL calls them liftarms and so users know to use that language rather
than using the term beam as they know that term is not used. The site still functions
despite not using the most common term. But if they are suddenly changed to beam,
then there will be confusion as the language used for them for years has changed.
Eventually it will settle as users get to know the new language, unless bricklink
thinks they made a mistake and changes them back. It doesn't really matter
too much what they are named, so long as the term used is consistent across parts
and isn't frequently changed.
Setting wikipedia aside (try to never use it) I agree with your take; round
is the more apt descriptive. Don't believe I would've even thought to
use the term "circular" in any case.
As there is a long history of using circular as the descriptive name for such
shields on BL, I know to use circular as the search term when trying to identify
a part number.
There is also another bonus of the current name, as 'round' is in the
part type name for many parts, a search for round shield also brings those up
too if they have a shield decoration on them. So changing the name would either
give more parts to look through, or requires more filters such as the part type
to narrow down the search.
But, of course, adding "round" doesn't mess up the current name and
strategies to search efficiently.
Well I remember locating those shields with the term round and not too long ago
Many of these shields have never had the term "round" in them. Some did,
but they were all standardized at some point.
Well the common main ones I always searched for did use the term round in the
description hence I couldn’t find them when I tried to search the other day?
either besides the catalog needs to work best for all which means novices/experienced
The catalog will never work best for "all". It will work best for most,
and that is hopefully what we strive for. Someone, somewhere is always going
to want something different from somebody else.
Now you’re just being pedantic... best for all is clearly a statement to emphasise
best for the wider community/majority etc...
alike and Nobody, I repeat nobody is going to think to use circular without knowing
You asked every single member of BrickLink? Now that is some dutiful research.
Well it seemed pretty obvious to me that nobody would search that term (at least
not in any numbers) just the same as I don’t need to do research as to whether
someone is likely to use the search term ‘Two-wheeler’ over using the search
terms Bike or Bicycle!
besides a round shield is a commonly used term for a type of shield and whilst
some items are best described by their shape others are best described by the
term in which is more generally used to describe the actual item. It seems circular
has only been used to describe the items shape alone!
in advance and therefore your argument about a few other items getting thrown
up in the search results with round is a minor concern in comparison
All concerns are important. One concern not being considered with your request
is that the term "circular" has been in use for a long time on some of
these parts, so changing them will mean relearning for many others who use the
current search terms.
Well to be frank I feel it’s more important that people actually get some matching
results on the most commonly used search terms. Those who already know the system
well, will be able to re-learn the changes quickly and/or find an alternative
way to find them as I did. The less experienced need to be able to find things
using the most logical search terms so they don’t end up giving up and not just
in relation to shields but all things in the catalog
Setting wikipedia aside (try to never use it) I agree with your take; round
is the more apt descriptive. Don't believe I would've even thought to
use the term "circular" in any case.
As there is a long history of using circular as the descriptive name for such
shields on BL, I know to use circular as the search term when trying to identify
a part number.
There is also another bonus of the current name, as 'round' is in the
part type name for many parts, a search for round shield also brings those up
too if they have a shield decoration on them. So changing the name would either
give more parts to look through, or requires more filters such as the part type
to narrow down the search.
But, of course, adding "round" doesn't mess up the current name and
strategies to search efficiently.
Well I remember locating those shields with the term round and not too long ago
Many of these shields have never had the term "round" in them. Some did,
but they were all standardized at some point.
Well the common main ones I always searched for did use the term round in the
description hence I couldn’t find them when I tried to search the other day?
either besides the catalog needs to work best for all which means novices/experienced
The catalog will never work best for "all". It will work best for most,
and that is hopefully what we strive for. Someone, somewhere is always going
to want something different from somebody else.
Now you’re just being pedantic... best for all is clearly a statement to emphasise
best for the wider community/majority etc...
alike and Nobody, I repeat nobody is going to think to use circular without knowing
You asked every single member of BrickLink? Now that is some dutiful research.
Well it seemed pretty obvious to me that nobody would search that term (at least
not in any numbers) just the same as I don’t need to do research as to whether
someone is likely to use the search term ‘Two-wheeler’ over using the search
terms Bike or Bicycle!
besides a round shield is a commonly used term for a type of shield and whilst
some items are best described by their shape others are best described by the
term in which is more generally used to describe the actual item. It seems circular
has only been used to describe the items shape alone!
in advance and therefore your argument about a few other items getting thrown
up in the search results with round is a minor concern in comparison
All concerns are important. One concern not being considered with your request
is that the term "circular" has been in use for a long time on some of
these parts, so changing them will mean relearning for many others who use the
current search terms.
Well to be frank I feel it’s more important that people actually get some matching
results on the most commonly used search terms. Those who already know the system
well, will be able to re-learn the changes quickly and/or find an alternative
way to find them as I did. The less experienced need to be able to find things
using the most logical search terms so they don’t end up giving up and not just
in relation to shields but all things in the catalog
I definitely agree with you that these items should come up with the searches
you talk about. The right way to do it would be having the ability to tag items
with many terms. Since we still don't have that ability, we surely have to
work to make sure things are relatively easy to pick up on from the titles alone,
which is unfortunate. So, massaging item names is never out of the question.
One thing we have discussed numerous times in our meetings is the balance between
the complexity of the hobby and everything it entails versus the learning curve
needed to obtain a certain amount of knowledge with that complexity. The BrickLink
XP venture was an attempt at really dumbing things down. That went way too far
in one direction and was by most accounts a failure. At the same time, the BrickLink
that we all know and love could use some much-needed changes and efficiencies
to bring some of the complexity down. What we want to find is that happy medium.
I for one am happy that we always have members questioning things so that we
can work towards that happy medium. It's one of the things that makes this
job enjoyable for me.
Based on some of the responses here and different arguments going off on a tangent
perhaps I should have elaborated on why I felt Round made more sense than circular
though I honestly thought most would share the same thought process so didn't
feel the need?
But my reasoning is because this would be the weapon/shields most commonly used
descriptive name
"They we're wielding Axes and Round Shields" NOT "They we're
wielding Blades on poles and Circular shields"
The fact that 'Round Shield' has a wikipedia and 'Circular Shield'
doesn't should tell you enough about which is the most appropriate and commonly
used descriptive term to use:-
I couldn't find the shield on first attempt or second attempt in fact I had
to search "Shield stud" and that only helped me because I already know
a little bit more about the descriptive terms used here but that won't help
newcomers who will almost certainly search round shield before anything else!
The consensus from this discussion is round instead of circular. Catalog Admins
please follow up!
Based on some of the responses here and different arguments going off on a tangent
perhaps I should have elaborated on why I felt Round made more sense than circular
though I honestly thought most would share the same thought process so didn't
feel the need?
But my reasoning is because this would be the weapon/shields most commonly used
descriptive name
"They we're wielding Axes and Round Shields" NOT "They we're
wielding Blades on poles and Circular shields"
The fact that 'Round Shield' has a wikipedia and 'Circular Shield'
doesn't should tell you enough about which is the most appropriate and commonly
used descriptive term to use:-
I couldn't find the shield on first attempt or second attempt in fact I had
to search "Shield stud" and that only helped me because I already know
a little bit more about the descriptive terms used here but that won't help
newcomers who will almost certainly search round shield before anything else!
We will discuss this at our next meeting. I don't want to make any sweeping
changes without discussing it with the whole team first.
Based on some of the responses here and different arguments going off on a tangent
perhaps I should have elaborated on why I felt Round made more sense than circular
though I honestly thought most would share the same thought process so didn't
feel the need?
But my reasoning is because this would be the weapon/shields most commonly used
descriptive name
"They we're wielding Axes and Round Shields" NOT "They we're
wielding Blades on poles and Circular shields"
The fact that 'Round Shield' has a wikipedia and 'Circular Shield'
doesn't should tell you enough about which is the most appropriate and commonly
used descriptive term to use:-
I couldn't find the shield on first attempt or second attempt in fact I had
to search "Shield stud" and that only helped me because I already know
a little bit more about the descriptive terms used here but that won't help
newcomers who will almost certainly search round shield before anything else!
We will discuss this at our next meeting. I don't want to make any sweeping
changes without discussing it with the whole team first.
Cheers,
Randy
You have a lot to discuss then! Don't forget my request for the LEGO books
- you know what I mean.
Based on some of the responses here and different arguments going off on a tangent
perhaps I should have elaborated on why I felt Round made more sense than circular
though I honestly thought most would share the same thought process so didn't
feel the need?
But my reasoning is because this would be the weapon/shields most commonly used
descriptive name
"They we're wielding Axes and Round Shields" NOT "They we're
wielding Blades on poles and Circular shields"
The fact that 'Round Shield' has a wikipedia and 'Circular Shield'
doesn't should tell you enough about which is the most appropriate and commonly
used descriptive term to use:-
I couldn't find the shield on first attempt or second attempt in fact I had
to search "Shield stud" and that only helped me because I already know
a little bit more about the descriptive terms used here but that won't help
newcomers who will almost certainly search round shield before anything else!
We will discuss this at our next meeting. I don't want to make any sweeping
changes without discussing it with the whole team first.
Cheers,
Randy
You have a lot to discuss then! Don't forget my request for the LEGO books
- you know what I mean.
As promised, we discussed this topic in detail at our monthly admin meeting last
week.
While discussing the topic, we reviewed the naming of the entire shield category.
Since most of the other parts in the shield category are named according to the
adjective form of the shape they are in (e.g. triangular instead of triangle,
pentagonal instead of pentagon, elliptical instead of ellipse, etc.), it follows
that circular should remain for consistency. However, there was a unanimous decision
that the term "round" should also be included in the name of all circular
shields. Thus, "round" has been added as an additional search term to
all of the shields that are in the shape of a circle.
The only other change that was made was to replace the word "ovoid" to
"oval" in the corresponding shields.
United Kingdom, England
USA, Oklahoma
France, Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur
Canada, Ontario
Someone, somewhere is always going
)
)
)
Netherlands, Overijssel