ELR Home   Create recipe   Resource page   My recipes/favorites

Updating flavor naming conventions (an update from Sprks)

#42

Not just creams obviously, I have flavors now that read like this :

  1. cake, lemon (inawera)
  2. cake, creamy sponge (fw)

Probably to follow soon:

  1. cake, Angel (wf)
  2. cake, fluffy, white (wf)
  3. cake, lava (lb)

And so on. Then we might see funny ones such as pie, lemon meringue (cap)

I understand it as stated above but it’s more confusing then it does good imo.

Nobody ever going to say, oh I let me bake cake lava today, and while obviously both words still show when searched for one or the other, when I make a shopping list, this will be extremely frustrating at least for me.

I guess if that’s the new format we all will need to get used to that, but it’s for sure weird lol.

Edit: meantime we have people already not able to add the flavors on a bottle, long existing problem but let’s look at that for a second.

We have currently a entry for:

  1. carrot cake (sc)(wf)
  2. carrot cake (wf)(sc)
  3. carrot cake (wf)

How difficult can it be to search first and then add to stash. Everyone wants their own naming? I don’t get it lol.

With these problems I guess something like cake, carrot (wf)(sc) wouldn’t be much better or worse.

5 Likes

#43

I think that’s the safety net that is allowing Sparkles to set it up this way. After all, there must be some sort of uniformity, and at least when the keywords hit you will still find what you are looking for. Otherwise, you’d have the ‘easy’ ones, (Cake, Yellow) in the intuitive comma format, and then the not-so-easy ones (Lave Cake) in non-comma format, and that can get real hairy real quick to build. So I guess it is what it is at this point.

3 Likes

#44

In this world there are doers and whiners. No good deed shall go unpunished.

5 Likes

#45

Is there any reason we can’t set up our stash as we please but use standards for recipes we intend to make public? Once it’s all said and done this is likely what I will do with the flavors whose title doesn’t suit me, it is after all my stash to work with.

3 Likes

#46

every flavor gets entered to the database, and every ‘wrong’ entry creates more and more confusion. sort of a cascade effect that can’t be stopped.

If anyone asked me (and it’s actually good they don’t) the database would contain only ‘verified’ flavors but thats almost impossible to implement due to reasons previously stated in the thread.

It’s all down to us users now to make sure we don’t mess it up further

5 Likes

#47

So what I enter into my stash gets entered into the collective data base or just the flavors from public recipes?

2 Likes

#48

Correct.
And the drop-down selection lists poll from ALL of the available matching options in the database, when it comes time for the database to suggest names to someone that’s trying to pick the new flavor (that they’ve just bought/received) from the list, to add to their stash.

3 Likes

#49

Well that’s a drag but okay. Guess I’ll get used to it.

2 Likes

#50

Public vs Private flavors have been one of many previous suggestions for possible improvements.
But again, for the time being, we have to work in the here and now (IOW: with what we have). :wink:

5 Likes

#51

In all honesty I would much prefer a self organized stash. Alphabetical order doesn’t really suit my needs. Would love a separate private stash option. I find this site valuable enough to go with the flow. As stated I’ll get used to it.

6 Likes

#52

I like having all my apples in a barrel too, that’s how they are in my holders. :slight_smile:

I just got into the habit of doing this

These type searches refine it better for you

(cr wh) or (wh cr) - both bring up the same
(ba nu)
(va cu)

They jump right to these names no problemo

whipped cream
banana nut bread
vanilla custard

EDIT > Isnt eveyone use to this? When you go shopping all the cakes are in the same Aisle

3 Likes

#53

Good maybe it will be implemented, I find the public stash next to useless, Other than the median and average use percentages.The notes and other functions are subjective and useless to me. Your attempts are quit heroic I must say and a venture I would not have attempted.

5 Likes

#54

Download your Stash.csv file. change the name to Stash.txt, unless you use excel. And your notes are backed up. Same with recipes Export the Recipes.csv and the Recipes.csv (one per line) The former has only the recipes the later has your notes, I just do all 3 of theses everytime I mix or change something. just-in-case.

5 Likes

#55

Same here Rob.

5 Likes

#56

This is yet another issue that nobody has mentioned… changing the flavor names makes it more complicated to actually shop for flavors.
Just head over to chefs and search for “apple fuji” and you won’t find FA Fuji
https://www.chefsflavours.co.uk/search?controller=search&orderby=position&orderway=desc&search_query=apple+fuji&submit_search=

Yet they do have it: https://www.chefsflavours.co.uk/flavourart-concentrates/2524-fuji-apple.html?search_query=fuji&results=5

All I’m saying is that we change one flawed situation with another, there are unintended consequences with the way this naming is going. There must be a better way of doing things with the tools we have today.

5 Likes

#57

I’ve tried to read, and keep up with the majority of this thread, out of respect for @Sprkslfly and what he’s been trying to do, but I’m sure I’ve missed a few points above.

I don’t think I’ve seen the following mentioned, and I’m not sure if it’s do-able or not, but an idea.

  1. Clean up existing database (not an easy task), along with a new naming convention that most of us can agree with.
    2 STOP all direct access to the database, i.e. just because someone ENTERS an incorrect flavor/naming convention, the new entry is NOT added to the database until it is APPROVED by a staff member ??

Not sure if that’s do-able by Lars and/or the impact of having possibly a large number of “pending” flavors, BUT they would NEVER make it into the database, UNTIL approved by a staff member. I don’t know about ALL of the specifics, but if I add a flavor "Hoochie Kootchie Koo (ABC), it will show up in my stash, even show up in my recipe, but it DOESN’T get added to the database (public), and does NOT show up in the drop down list as a choice. You could even set a flag to these “unapproved” flavors “pending” or whatever needs done.

Maybe something ELSE that should be manditory would be a flavor/manufacturer required reading page. HELL, you could even SEND a member TO said page if they did TRY to add a new borked flavor, as a helpful reminder.

Don’t know, just some thoughts. Having things posted, but NOT yet in approved status is not a new thing, and perhaps we could utilize that here.

5 Likes

#58

@Suomynona Very smart thinking to think through these unintended consequences ahead of time.

3 Likes

#59

But unfortunately “us users” really only applies to those of us who are hip to the naming protocols and who frequent this forum enough to be aware of them. I see new users coming in every day with nary a clue and if they haven’t already, they will soon outnumber those of us who are already clued in.

And you’re right @adary…unless the dB is locked down with only verified names it just won’t improve.

9 Likes

#60

A little wider access to the flavor database could work too. Wikipedia has been working that way for nearly 2 decades and it’s self-healing.

2 Likes

#61

??? In terms of being able to edit?

2 Likes