|
I will definitely add a check for series duplicates, that is an excellent idea. I think that will pickup one of the main frustrations people have where two series with the same number are actually completely different (and you get into numbering issues etc). Ideally you want your series names to be unique.
Missing books in a series? I'm not convinced. It isn't going to be able to tell you that you are missing #3 in a trilogy that you have #1 and #2 for. It will also return false positives in the scenarios where say you have an omnibus edition that covers books 1 & 2, so a supposed "gap" isn't really a gap. Then there is the whole issue of numbering of series indexes for magazines, people who always use partials etc. So I'm not going to include it at this point.
Having a mixture of full and partial indexes is not an "error" for many users. I like a lot of people intermix related short stories for a series by putting them in with a "x.1" index, with the main full books having the normal 1,2,3 index values. So I'm also not convinced on that one.
As for magazine related ones, they fall into the same category as "Missing parts" to me. These are not issues with the quality of the metadata (or conversions) of books in your library, which is what this plugin is aimed at. A lot of these are fairly bespoke to how you are storing and using the series index field. Maybe I can be convinced further down the track to add such checks but for now it is out of scope.
As for title case information, the algorithm is aimed at English names. No there is no customisation capability. It is all based on some open source code that is part of the Calibre library. So I would suggest not using the check (or the Calibre title case function) if it does not give you the results you would like. If you want it enhanced, as it is a Calibre function you should go through the normal feature request for Calibre route.
|