Time for a TN sort?

[DRT]

The Tasting Note index has been updated today.

The TN count has increased from 7104 to 7811 since the last update on 4 Aug 2019.

[griff]

Thank you Sir!

[JacobH]

Thank you, as always. And also for the work on the forum software!

[winesecretary]

@ DRT - thank you, very much appreciated. This is a remarkable resource.

[DRT]

The forum software upgrades are lots of work and risk, the TN upgrades not so much. Feel free to nudge me for the latter more frequently.

[DRT]

The Tasting Note index has been updated today.

The TN count has increased from 7104 to 7811 since the last update on 4 Aug 2019.

Thank you to Alex Bridgeman for the work he has done this week correcting erroneous data in the Tasting Note titles. The index has been updated to reflect these corrections, plus 48 new TN's since 3 Nov 21.

[flash_uk]

The Tasting Note index has been updated today.

The TN count has increased from 7104 to 7811 since the last update on 4 Aug 2019.

Thank you to Alex Bridgeman for the work he has done this week correcting erroneous data in the Tasting Note titles. The index has been updated to reflect these corrections, plus 48 new TN's since 3 Nov 21.

Thanks Alex

[Alex Bridgeman]

Derek has just posted my latest update of the TN indices and a revised guide to naming tasting notes. Following the naming guide will make the updating of the index easier for me next time (which I plan to be in June).

The index covers all tasting notes posted in or before 2022.

If you spot any errors in the indices, please let me know.

[nac]

If you spot any errors in the indices, please let me know.

Think this is wrong - viewtopic.php?t=153&hilit=fojo

Should be Churchill Fojo?

[nac]

If you spot any errors in the indices, please let me know.

Appears to be an error on the main Tasting Notes page as well.

Some of the "jump to" links don't work - D, L, X, Y & Z.

LXYZ don't have any associated notes (so possibly might expect to jump to the nearest letter?), but D does.

[Alex Bridgeman]

If you spot any errors in the indices, please let me know.

Think this is wrong - viewtopic.php?t=153&hilit=fojo

Should be Churchill Fojo?

Thank you. I'll update the name, which will get picked up in the next index update.

[Alex Bridgeman]

If you spot any errors in the indices, please let me know.

Appears to be an error on the main Tasting Notes page as well.

Some of the "jump to" links don't work - D, L, X, Y & Z.

LXYZ don't have any associated notes (so possibly might expect to jump to the nearest letter?), but D does.

That one I will have to leave to DRT, who wrote the code for the jump links. That's beyond my pay-grade.

[PhilW]

Some of the "jump to" links don't work - D, L, X, Y & Z.

LXYZ don't have any associated notes (so possibly might expect to jump to the nearest letter?), but D does.

You're correct that L, X, Y Z don't work as there is no tasting note starting with those letters. Ideally I would suggest that those letters for which there is no index (due to no tasting notes starting with that letter) could either not be present, or preferably should just be the letter and not a link as well. However, I don't know whether that might be simple or tricky for the generating script; if the latter, am happy to leave as-is for those.

The D is failing because the relevant reference within the main html has the wrong case. Specifically:
The D at the top of the page links to .../tn_index_alpha.html#D
while the first row entry for D starts with <tr id="d"> which should be <tr id="D">
All other row id references are capitalised; presumably this is a bug in the generating script? (I don't know where this kept, so can't check). Derek?

[DRT]

Sorry chaps, just picked this up.

Will have a look at the template and try to fix.

Thanks for reporting

[DRT]

I have found the problem.

The formula used to generate the html tests for incraments in the first letter of the name of each port on the list. When it returns a new letter it inserts a reference for that letter in the index that the relevant jump link points to. It inserts upper case references.

The problem is that some lucky people opened a bottle of "1908 da Silva Colheita" in New York in May 2015 and it happens to be the first in the list after "C" but begins with a lower case "d", which the code does not accommodate.

I will work on a solution but in the meantime have bodged a fix into the current published version of the index.

The reason why the other letters do not jump to the index is as Phil described, they have nowhere to jump to.

[MigSU]

I suppose a quick and dirty solution would be to change it to "1908 Da Silva Colheita".

[DRT]

I suppose a quick and dirty solution would be to change it to "1908 Da Silva Colheita".

I thought of that, but I think it would be better to fix the problem permanently.

[flash_uk]

I've been posting a backlog of notes. I think we may find one or two tastings in the past two years where we have multiple posts for the same bottle. I've definitiely noticed it for this tasting: Mon 24 April 2023, reprise of a tasting in 1993

for example:
1970 Gould Campbell
1970 Gould Campbell

How is this usually handled? Merge the posts?

[Alex Bridgeman]

I've been posting a backlog of notes. I think we may find one or two tastings in the past two years where we have multiple posts for the same bottle. I've definitiely noticed it for this tasting: Mon 24 April 2023, reprise of a tasting in 1993

for example:
1970 Gould Campbell
1970 Gould Campbell

How is this usually handled? Merge the posts?

That’s how I’ve always handled things in the past. I’ve tried to keep notes on the same bottle together in the same topic. Occasionally someone posts notes on a different bottle as a reply in a thread; I’ll usually split those out into a new and separate topic.

But are we doing this the right way? Someone commented to me the other day that they would prefer all tasting notes for a wine to be in the same thread, regardless whether they were the same bottle or not, so they can read one thread and not have to keep jumping backwards and forwards to find out what we think of a particular Port.

Should we change the way our tasting notes are structured?

[flash_uk]

But are we doing this the right way? Someone commented to me the other day that they would prefer all tasting notes for a wine to be in the same thread, regardless whether they were the same bottle or not, so they can read one thread and not have to keep jumping backwards and forwards to find out what we think of a particular Port.

If that approach was adopted I think we’d need to be careful to preface each note with the date and event when the bottle was tasted, otherwise we have a melange of different bottle notes and different notes on the same bottle.

I have a preference for the current approach. If I am wondering what a 1963 Rebello Valente might be like, I go to the index and right click five or six notes from recent times and open them each in a new tab and read them. This way, I find it easy to spot the Alex Bridgeman note for each bottle and learn how that taster found the five or six different bottles. I can also see quickly if other tasters had a difference of opinion. Maybe Alex had a dirty glass on one occasion and was not impressed by the port, whereas everyone else liked it?

[MigSU]

I too prefer the current approach. One TN per bottle (ideally).

[winesecretary]

I support the current one note per bottle approach. I have always found it straightforward to navigate.

[nac]

Should we change the way our tasting notes are structured?

No.

[nac]

Should we change the way our tasting notes are structured?

No.

That said, I think there might be a case for allowing a bit more information in the note title - for example, allowing "1994 Warre (released 2022)" might be useful?