Oracle

G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

The Oracle files, or at least some of them, finally turned up on Friday.
The format has been messed up, though... Most lines have a varying
number of trailing blanks.

And the braces are gone from all costs!

Is this good or bad? Well, I guess it might make the file more readable
for human eyes. But it will make it much harder to write a program to
read it for you. Ordinary casting costs are all right but it's no fun to
single out activations costs from the text. And there is no longer a way
to tell that the 3s in the lines (from the old file)

Sorcery spells cost {3} more to play.

and

Counter target spell with converted mana cost 3 or less.

are actually printed differently.

Maybe this doesn't really matter... Personally I still hope that this is
an honest mistake and that the files will be replaced soon...

/ug
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004, [ISO-8859-1] Ulf Göransson wrote:

> The Oracle files, or at least some of them, finally turned up on Friday.
> The format has been messed up, though...

I think it's because of Gatherer. Also the text spoiler doesn't contain
flavor texts anymore.

> Most lines have a varying number of trailing blanks.
>
> And the braces are gone from all costs!

And have you seen the <I> codes? It's horrible.
And what do you think of the AE turned into one character and the other
extended ascii charaters like the u with an accent circumflex and stuff?
I personaly liked it better when it was plain text.

>
> Is this good or bad?

I think it's very bad. I've sayd it before but you're the first one who
seems to agree.

[snip example]
> Maybe this doesn't really matter... Personally I still hope that this is
> an honest mistake and that the files will be replaced soon...

Me too.
--

David
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

"David de Kloet" <dskloet@few.vu.nl> wrote in message
news😛ine.GSO.4.56.0410172056470.24300@galjas.cs.vu.nl...
On Sun, 17 Oct 2004, [ISO-8859-1] Ulf Göransson wrote:
> > The Oracle files, or at least some of them, finally turned up on Friday.
> > The format has been messed up, though...
>
> I think it's because of Gatherer.

That is so cheesy! They didn't want to update oracle again, so they just
used Gatherer to save themselves time... at the cost of an extreme reduction
in quality.

> Most lines have a varying number of trailing blanks.
>
> And the braces are gone from all costs!

And have you seen the <I> codes? It's horrible.
And what do you think of the AE turned into one character and the other
extended ascii charaters like the u with an accent circumflex and stuff?
I personaly liked it better when it was plain text.

> >
> > Is this good or bad?
>
> I think it's very bad. I've sayd it before but you're the first one who
> seems to agree.

Me too!

> [snip example]
> > Maybe this doesn't really matter... Personally I still hope that this is
> > an honest mistake and that the files will be replaced soon...
>
> Me too.

me three!
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

David de Kloet wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Oct 2004, [ISO-8859-1] Ulf G?ransson wrote:
>>The Oracle files, or at least some of them, finally turned up on Friday.
>>The format has been messed up, though...
>
> I think it's because of Gatherer. Also the text spoiler doesn't contain
> flavor texts anymore.

No, they don't. And colour and artist is missing too...

>>Most lines have a varying number of trailing blanks.
>>And the braces are gone from all costs!
>
> And have you seen the <I> codes? It's horrible.

I hadn't noticed that. Ouch!

> And what do you think of the AE turned into one character and the other
> extended ascii charaters like the u with an accent circumflex and stuff?
> I personaly liked it better when it was plain text.

Actually, I can live with that. I usually end up translating them into
the original names anyway, and in cases when I don't want those, it's
far easier to do the translation the other way around.
But it will most likely mean trouble for those that use other character
sets. And comparing the file to previous versions won't be much fun...

Hmm... So they've changed the names so that they now contain enough
information to be printed accurately. But at the same time, they've
_removed_ all such information from the rules text.
I just don't see the logic!

/ug
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 21:04:07 +0200, David de Kloet <dskloet@few.vu.nl>
wrote:

<Oracle texts are different because of Gatherer>

One other difference you apparently haven't caught yet: Subtypes are
now "Creature - bla" not "Creature -- bla".
Not that big a difference, but it has kinda killed the subtype search
on your card search page <http://www.cs.vu.nl/~dskloet/magic/> - it's
easily fixable by manually editing the SQL search string, but I just
thought you should be made aware.


Ps. Your database r0><X0Rz - I use it all the time :)
Now if you could also put in links to the new Gatherer autocard
windows (that can show the different versions of the card art) it
would beat Gatherer in every way possible...

--
Regards
Simon Nejmann
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

On Tue, 19 Oct 2004, Simon Nejmann wrote:

> On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 21:04:07 +0200, David de Kloet <dskloet@few.vu.nl>
> wrote:
>
> <Oracle texts are different because of Gatherer>
>
> One other difference you apparently haven't caught yet: Subtypes are
> now "Creature - bla" not "Creature -- bla".
> Not that big a difference, but it has kinda killed the subtype search
> on your card search page <http://www.cs.vu.nl/~dskloet/magic/> - it's
> easily fixable by manually editing the SQL search string, but I just
> thought you should be made aware.

Very good that you mention it. I've fixed it. But while fixing it I
noticed yet another error in the oracle: The typeline of the (not
snow-covered) basic lands is just 'Land' instead of 'Basic Land - <foo>'.

> Ps. Your database r0><X0Rz - I use it all the time :)

Always nice to get compliments :)

> Now if you could also put in links to the new Gatherer autocard
> windows (that can show the different versions of the card art) it
> would beat Gatherer in every way possible...

That's already on my todo-list. Wherer should I put those links? In the
table showing all the versions?

--

David
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.trading-cards.magic.rules (More info?)

On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:09:40 +0200, David de Kloet <dskloet@few.vu.nl>
wrote:

>On Tue, 19 Oct 2004, Simon Nejmann wrote:

>Very good that you mention it. I've fixed it. But while fixing it I
>noticed yet another error in the oracle: The typeline of the (not
>snow-covered) basic lands is just 'Land' instead of 'Basic Land - <foo>'.

Hmm, I think I know how that is happening... You build your database
by parsing the "all cards" file
<http://www.wizards.com/dci/oracle/OracleAll_041020.txt>, right? Try
to open that in a text editor and search for "land - forest", you
should now find:

Forest
Basic Land - Forest
[G]

Forest
Land
[G]

Yup, that is a basic forests followed by a non-basic one... My guess
is that, when you build your database, the second (faulty) one
overwrites the first (correct) one.

BTW, a search for "forest" in Gatherer turns up two forests too - but
then again I guess we already have determined, without a doubt, that
the new oracle file is just a full printout of Gatherer.

>> Now if you could also put in links to the new Gatherer autocard
>> windows (that can show the different versions of the card art) it
>> would beat Gatherer in every way possible...
>
>That's already on my todo-list. Wherer should I put those links? In the
>table showing all the versions?

Yes, I think it would fit best there.

--
Regards
Simon Nejmann