A question about CASES

Several years ago, there was a competing modular site that not only showed modules available, it also had a section for CASES.

Now, yeah, I get it...it would be rather difficult to be able to insert tons of cases into the MG database and then have users building in them, calling a usable case pattern up for their build. That just sounds like a coding headache.

BUT...while MG is now the de facto "catalog" for the major synth formats, we have no listings for cases, which strikes me as a sizable hole in the completeness. At present, the only real method that exists to shop for cases is to prowl around various commerce sites, forums, etc etc etc. But would it be possible to at least "gallery" cases on here with their specs so that the MG 'one-stop' method can even apply there, making things LITERALLY 'one-stop'? I realize that that's even more spinning plates to deal with, true, but it would make it so much simpler to be able to decide ALL of your possible build actions right here without leaving the site.

Also, I don't think it would be necessary to have custom cases in this situation. Instead, concentrating this purely on the commercially-available case lines out there makes more sense, as DIYers are apt to simply build what they want for whatever spaces and circumstances exist in their situations. This is really more for the beginning synthesists, so that they can get a clearer idea as to space, ergonomics, power capabilities, portability, etc etc.

Doable? Ish?

Sounds like a good idea to me (if it is doable)

Right...IF it's doable. I know already that this would require some tinkering with the various databases, but I think if the mods keep to ONLY commercially-available cases, it shouldn't be too chaotic to add this. Also, what I envision would simply be a "gallery" of sorts where the case specs (power especially!), form factor, etc can be shown alongside an image of the case in question. Definitely NOT calling for being able to USE the cases in builds, as that really WOULD be too much to expect in terms of necessary coding and other headaches.

So my thoughts would be:
1. Powered cases
2. Unpowered cases
3. Power supplies

I don't think it would be worth it to have cases available for building a virtual rack. It falls into the "would be nice" column.
But having the information available to peruse would be awesome. I would include a main picture of the case. Then I'd allow users to upload their own custom pictures of the case (with or without modules) to add to the description.

The description should also include the number of rows, the HP of each row, and the size of the row (3U or 1U) and the format of the row (useful for 1U set-ups since 1U isn't standardized).

Precisely the sort of thing I was thinking of, Ronin...not a massive change to the site's scripting that would allow you whatever cab you wanted for your build. I think we can stick with the current case layout models for the Grid itself. This would be more of a "gallery" of cabs with full (authoritative!) specs, with space available probably being the best ranking criteria. That way, you could just use the navigation buttons in the existing scripting like we do with modules...you just wouldn't have the ability to pop one up onscreen to build in.

Right now, I see three primary criteria on the case listings:

1) Form factor. Is this a case? A rack housing? If it's a case, is it portable? Does it offer a lid for transport? Does it fold for transportation?
2) Power. Is the case powered? If so, does it use flying busses or fixed busboards? Is the AC supply internal or external. How much current is available? Is the power in "zones" (think Arturia here) or overall?
3) Dimensions. How deep can the modules be? How wide are the rows? What's the total available hp? What external physical dimensions does a case have? If it folds, how big is it for transport?

As far as materials, special latching (like ATA-compliant hardware) and so on...those can be in the case descriptions. Sticking with the above criteria for sorting and sifting through seems to me to be key here.