Best way to handle two or more PDF variants for single book?

[Mekk]

What is the best way to preserve two alternative .pdf files for the same book inside Calibre? Is there anything better than creating second book with similar name?

Example: I recently bought some ebooks from Rosenfeld Media. They provide two versions of .pdf file - one "for print" (a4, fonts and illustrations adapted for printing) and one "for screen reading" (smaller format, hyperlinks, table of contents etc). At the moment I see nothing better than adding (for print) and (for screen) to the title but maybe there is a better way?

[Manichean]

You won't get around creating a second entry for that book, but you don't necessarily need to distinguish the entries by title, you could use e.g. the tag field for that.

[Starson17]

Originally Posted by Manichean

You won't get around creating a second entry for that book

He can't get around it if he wants direct access. When I want that, I do as you suggest, and store identical title, identical author versions, and tag them differently.

However, when I just want to store the "extra" formats together with the version I normally use I do it inside a compressed format, like zip, rar, etc.

The trick to doing this is to store the extras inside the compressed format as a non-ebook format - like a compressed format - so the "other" formats or duplicate formats are always compressed two levels deep. That prevents Calibre from being confused, as Calibre will otherwise try to unpack any first level compressed format.

IOW, I do it like this. Say I have several versions of a book that I want to store together with with my "reading copy" formats. I proceed as follows:

1) compress each individual format (right click and "Add to Archive")
2) select all the compressed formats and right click and "Add to Archive" again.
3) Add that final archive to Calibre.
4) I use RAR as my general purpose holding format and leave ZIP for HTML.
5) I leave RAR assigned to the RAR unpacker, so that clicking on the RAR, opens it to see the other files inside.


(An alternative to two level deep compression is to always have at least two ebook formats inside the RAR, but I was always forgetting to put in the second format.)

[Lady Fitzgerald]

I would think the OP's method would be more visible and faster to access the book of choice. It would also require less work to set up initially. One could add a custom column to distinguish the difference but, besides being more work to set up, it would occupy more screen real estate.

[Starson17]

Originally Posted by Lady Fitzgerald

I would think the OP's method would be more visible and faster to access the book of choice.

If this comment is pointed at me, I completely agree. My method isn't intended for visibility or for speed of access. It's designed to ensure that certain formats always stay in a single record (even though I already have that format in the record) and to ensure that they are never separated from the record and can't be lost. There are situations where I have multiple versions of the same format and need them kept with the "best" copy of the same format. Visibility and speed of access are not a consideration - organization is.

[Lady Fitzgerald]

Originally Posted by Starson17

Visibility and speed of access are not a consideration - organization is.

Umm...I'm confused (it happens a lot at my age). How would appending a title with the version adversely affect organization?

[Manichean]

Originally Posted by Lady Fitzgerald

Umm...I'm confused (it happens a lot at my age). How would appending a title with the version adversely affect organization?

Well, you'd have two entries for what is, information-wise, the same book.

[Starson17]

Originally Posted by Manichean

Well, you'd have two entries for what is, information-wise, the same book.

Yes. These two entries have the same source so I want to keep them together in one record. It might not normally be a problem to keep them as separate entries, except that I may have another original source book with the same title/author. Then it starts to get confusing. Which modified version went with which original source? I just needed a way to keep all the related files in a single record, even if there were some duplicate formats. At any given time there's only one of each format that I consider to be the "best" and need access to, but I still want to keep an identical format stored in that record. Later I may unpack the "second best" and process it further or swap it for what was previously considered to be the best.

[Lady Fitzgerald]

Originally Posted by Manichean

Well, you'd have two entries for what is, information-wise, the same book.

Moby Dick (print)
Moby Dick (read)

I really don't see how this would adversely affect organization. It certainly makes finding and access a book far easier, which is the whole purpose of organization. And it is far easier to do initially.

[Manichean]

Originally Posted by Lady Fitzgerald

I really don't see how this would adversely affect organization. It certainly makes finding and access a book far easier, which is the whole purpose of organization. And it is far easier to do initially.

Well, that depends on how OCD you are about such matters, doesn't it? And of course on what one values in his library organization, as Starson has already explained.