usage of Inducks versus official data

[Richard]

Regarding what Gary Leach wrote:

>Egmont at one time supply photocopied galleys to publishers - as they 
>did for Gladstone - that provided full contents, including b&w art with 
>complete dialogue, titles, and story codes, of upcoming publications. 

I think that for the publishers, Inducks and official Egmont data will be used 
differently. Egmont provides full data on each story - including the story 
itself - so this will always be better than Inducks. On the other hand, if 
you want to find eg all stories ever published with Panchito and Donald, 
Inducks seems the best. I don't know if Gemstone has an in-house database of 
Disney comics like other publishers do (I imagine that this would necessitate 
lots of time and ressource) - and Gemstone will only publish a tiny fraction 
of Disney comics anyway. But I can cite the example of the French publisher 
database (Hachette) who has very sparse credits: regarding old American 
artists, Hachette only "knows" Barks and Murry. While in Inducks you have the 
latest and most complete knowledge in most credits that you can possibly 
have.