Question about Don Rosa's family tree

[Daniel van Eijmeren]

HARRY FLUKS to me, 18-12-2003:

>> Can you also add the missing issue codes to the COA interface? At 
>> the moment, there are no issues codes shown at all. They can only 
>> be deciphered by looking at the URL.

> Issue codes are mainly of interest for indexers (we invent them 
> ourselves). I think there's no need to bother the COA user with 
> codes like that.

I *am* a COA user, and I *want* to be bothered with it.

>>> For practical reasons, we decided in Inducks to call the version 
>>> with sidebar "original", and the other one "changed".
 
>> If Rosa made two versions by himself, then this solution is highly 
>> debatable. At least for me. 

> The reason for that may be that you missed the debate that we 
> Inducksers had about this subject.

I don't think that's the reason. Debates are not as important as their 
results. And there are also many other COA-users who don't know about 
any debate at all.

>> I can only see that it has "changes". By just looking at COA, 
>> I cannot know if those changes are the very same as in other publications.
>> In other words: I got you here! (Didn't I?) :-)

> No, you didn't. It says "Changes: sidebar with DA,AMJ,GY,HLP is missing". 
> And for every other reprint with the same "Changes" comment, those 
> changes are the very same. Simple, isn't it?

No. The comment doesn't say that the changes are the very same.
The characters could have been removed in different ways. 

>> "takes"
>> "mixes"
>> "overdubs"

> You completely lost me, here. I don't know what these technical 
> terms mean. But I also think I don't need to know.

I'm going to throw a tantrum. This sounds so ignorant! 

"I don't understand your hours of typing and thinking, 
but what do I care?"

>> I can't work out a better system all by myself. At least not for 
>> Inducks.

> Neither could I, in the past 10 years. And currently I don't want 
> to, either.

What a way of discussing... :-(

> Inducks has some minor flaws for people who want *very* exact 
> information about Barks or Rosa creations. I can live with that.

I don't call them "minor flaws". I know quite a lot about Barks. But 
when looking at COA, I sometimes don't get a clue what exactly is
meant. So, I'm curious if "Barks dummies" would know what's going on.

And since Rosa is making multiple versions of stories, these instances 
are not just a few exceptions anymore. What art does an editor need if 
he wants to publish Rosa's long version of a story, without having to 
solve a jigsaw puzzle? The same for Barks stories like 'Back to the 
Klondike' (OS 456) and 'How Green Was My Lettuce' (US 51). 

And what about the new art that Jippes and Rosa made for those two 
stories? It's very nice that they've created that new work, but it 
muddies the water even further. And COA doesn't provide any clue. 
So, these stories keep on being used in different ways, because people 
have to draw their own conclusions.

--- Daniël