Bulk MDE S&R questions

[BetterRed]

A custom column date can be cleared via the purpose built button that is automatically created in the Bulk MDE Custom Columns tab. But it would suit my purposes better if I could do it via saved Bulk MDE S&R definition. I have two related Bulk S&R definitions - a_move_date, b_counter++ - this would be a third - d_clear date

So I am looking for a Bulk MDE S&R definition to clear a custom date
===============

Has anyone any thoughts on how I could get calibre to support lists of dates? I assume it can't be done without major effort.

So, my idea is to convert a date value into a YYYY-MM-DD formatted string and store that in a tag-like value. Should I ever want use any arithmetic or date template functions I would have to reconvert the strings back to dates.

So the question is - can someone furnish a Bulk MDE definition that will convert a custom date value into to a 'YYYY-MM-DD' string and append it to a custom tag-like value.

I would name the definition c_save_date
================

So now I would have the following definitions -- a_move_date, b_counter++, c_save_date, d_clear date -- that I would execute consecutively in that order.

Failure to execute the definitions in the right order, or inadvertently skipping a step, could result in data loss.

So, it would be useful if I could put those four definitions into a group and execute the group in a single operation, anyone have any thoughts on that?

BR

[chaley]

Originally Posted by BetterRed

A custom column date can be cleared via the purpose built button that is automatically created in the Bulk MDE Custom Columns tab. But it would suit my purposes better if I could do it via saved Bulk MDE S&R definition. I have two related Bulk S&R definitions - a_move_date, b_counter++ - this would be a third - d_clear date

So I am looking for a Bulk MDE S&R definition to clear a custom date

See attachment 1. Note that there is a problem with the current release of calibre where the date isn't cleared properly. I have submitted a fix.

So the question is - can someone furnish a Bulk MDE definition that will convert a custom date value into to a 'YYYY-MM-DD' string and append it to a custom tag-like value.

See attachment.

So, it would be useful if I could put those four definitions into a group and execute the group in a single operation, anyone have any thoughts on that?

I know of no way to do that.

[BetterRed]

I had tried to do the date clear, when it didn't work I gave up in disgust - with myself

Someone we know will now have the stats they wanted

BR

[Terisa de morgan]

Originally Posted by BetterRed

So, it would be useful if I could put those four definitions into a group and execute the group in a single operation, anyone have any thoughts on that?

BR

My idea, as I've done it for other things: A plugin wich includes the operations. I don't know anything else.

[Tanjamuse]

Thanks to both Chaley and BetterRed for helping me solve a problem.

If someone should take the time to write a plugin, let me know and gladly test it out.

[BetterRed]

Originally Posted by Terisa de morgan

My idea, as I've done it for other things: A plugin wich includes the operations. I don't know anything else.

Terisa de morgan - am I right in assuming it would be relatively easy to write a PI to execute a specific set of S&R operations, as in Tanjamuse' - a_move_date, b_increment_counter, c_save_history, and d_clear_date sequence. Essentially everything would be hard coded.

As compared to a generic version with selection from a list, ordering of operations etc, saving of configuration in json... - as in View Manager, Reading List etc.

Originally Posted by Tanjamuse

Thanks to both Chaley and BetterRed for helping me solve a problem.

If someone should take the time to write a plugin, let me know and gladly test it out.

@Tanjamuse - If, as I've suggested above, it's relatively easy to write a 'private' PI specific for your needs then maybe you could write it (with help of course) and just as importantly you could maintain it.

BR

[Tanjamuse]

Originally Posted by BetterRed

Terisa de morgan - am I right in assuming it would be relatively easy to write a PI to execute a specific set of S&R operations, as in Tanjamuse' - a_move_date, b_increment_counter, c_save_history, and d_clear_date sequence. Essentially everything would be hard coded.

As compared to a generic version with selection from a list, ordering of operations etc, saving of configuration in json... - as in View Manager, Reading List etc.


@Tanjamuse - If, as I've suggested above, it's relatively easy to write a 'private' PI specific for your needs then maybe you could write it (with help of course) and just as importantly you could maintain it.

BR

Why not, I'm game

[Terisa de morgan]

Originally Posted by BetterRed

Terisa de morgan - am I right in assuming it would be relatively easy to write a PI to execute a specific set of S&R operations, as in Tanjamuse' - a_move_date, b_increment_counter, c_save_history, and d_clear_date sequence. Essentially everything would be hard coded.

Yes, you're right. You would need to configure only custom columns and the other things are simple (more or less, as I have been able to do them ). But, anyway, if I did a plugin I wouldn't really do as a S&R but some basic operations in python and metadata update.

[BetterRed]

Originally Posted by Terisa de morgan

Yes, you're right. You would need to configure only custom columns and the other things are simple (more or less, as I have been able to do them ). But, anyway, if I did a plugin I wouldn't really do as a S&R but some basic operations in python and metadata update.

Yes that what I thought - use the bulk S&R definitions as the specifications for a regular PI.

BR

[chaley]

Originally Posted by BetterRed

Yes that what I thought - use the bulk S&R definitions as the specifications for a regular PI.

BR

Out of curiosity, why are you considering doing it this way (emulating a series of search/replace) instead of a library-closed plugin?

[BetterRed]

It wouldn't be 'emulating' as I understand the word - the PI coder (hopefully Tanjamuse) would use the S&R definitions as the specification for a developing the PI. The S&R definitions would be the prototype - do IT people still do that.

I suggest Tanjamuse use the S&R definitions she now has as he basis for developing the workflow for her stats and once she has that working satisfactorily she can consider developing a PI to further automate the workflow.

There's a facet to the process Tanja hasn't raised here, which is dealing with the Evernote notes she raises against the books on her Tab. These relate to errors and omissions in the book metadata and changes to the book contents.

BR

A long time ago I wrote an emulator for the EE KDF 9 on IBM 360 - seemed a good idea at the time.

[Terisa de morgan]

Originally Posted by BetterRed

Yes that what I thought - use the bulk S&R definitions as the specifications for a regular PI.

BR

Not really the S&R but the requirements for the S&R and the steps:
1.- Recoger custom column (date) from db and format it as string => S&R could be useful here for format
2.- Recover custom column (tag) from db
3.- Append string to tag
4.- Save tags
5.- Save empty date

[BetterRed]

Originally Posted by Terisa de morgan

Not really the S&R but the requirements for the S&R and the steps:
1.- Recoger custom column (date) from db and format it as string => S&R could be useful here for format
2.- Recover custom column (tag) from db
3.- Append string to tag
4.- Save tags
5.- Save empty date

Maybe I should have used the words 'functional specification', i.e. the PI would implement what the S&R definitions do in respect of outcomes, but not necessarily how they do it.

But we're jumping the gun, lets get the S&R based solution working, which is awaiting 2.68 for a change chaley made yesterday and testing time. It may well be that Tanja and I can reduce the number of step from 4 to 2 and eliminate the danger of data loss if there's a missed or out of order step - in which case the need for a PI would be moot.

BR

[Terisa de morgan]

Originally Posted by BetterRed

Maybe I should have used the words 'functional specification', i.e. the PI would implement what the S&R definitions do in respect of outcomes, but not necessarily how they do it.

But we're jumping the gun, lets get the S&R based solution working, which is awaiting 2.68 for a change chaley made yesterday and testing time. It may well be that Tanja and I can reduce the number of step from 4 to 2 and eliminate the danger of data loss if there's a missed or out of order step - in which case the need for a PI would be moot.

BR

Ok, let's me know how it goes (out of curiosity )

[BetterRed]

Originally Posted by Terisa de morgan

Ok, let's me know how it goes (out of curiosity )

More likely Tanja will let you know by seeking your help to hold her hand through her first PI. Even if its not warranted she seems keen to giving it a whirl

Thanks for your input - much appreciated

BR