Rule states: Last chapter should be set to the final full chapter's number or the final chapter as marked by the publisher if possible.
To me, this rule is completely ambiguous as I will explain below in the P.P.S.
My suggestion is to modify this rule slightly. I believe the end icon should be the final "chapter" (I use quotes to differentiate what is said above). What I mean is the final item that has a chapter number to it, for example, extras. Extras don't formally have a chapter number assigned to them by the publisher, but MangaDex must assign a "chapter number" to the extras so they can be counted in the correct place as part of a volume. Because of this, I count he extra's chapter numbers as part of the volume and the volume doesn't end until after the last extra is counted.
As it stands now, the extras in the final volume are discounted as opposed to the extras in the previous volumes. My argument is why should the extras in the previous volumes be included in the story and the extras in the final volume not? (There is some leeway because of the word "should" in the rule.) Isn't this discrimination against the final volume's extras? My view is that the extras are part of the story somehow, otherwise the mangaka wouldn't have added them.
Let's look at an analogy using fictional volumes 1, 2, and 3 each with 4 chapters plus extras.
Picture this: each volume is a section of road. Let's say that the story is the tarred portion and the extras the concrete portion. Based on this this is how the road would look: tarred, concrete (volume 1), tarred, concrete (volume 2), tarred, concrete (volume 3). Lets add a brick wall (the end icon) at the end to indicate the end of the final volume (the back cover). Looking at this, each concrete portion of the road is just as much part of the road as the tarred portion. By placing the brick wall before the final concrete part of the road, means (to me) that that the final concrete portion of the road will never be driven over. Anything beyond the brick wall just doesn't exist (which should mean the back cover of the final volume).
Let's suppose there is an epilogue (a lot of mangas have that). Usually, the chapter before the epilogue is labeled in the volume as "final" or "fin" at the beginning of the chapter or the end. Technically, the epilogue is not an "extra," but still very much part of the story. Even the mangaka's notes are part of the story because that is where s/he explains what s/he did and why s/he did it. And, many times, the mangaka puts the word "bye" at the end of his/her notes which also means "the end." There are also chapters where the mangaka puts "fin" at the end of every chapter (or sub-story). The original rule, as it stands, does not take that inconsistency into account due to the second phrase of the rule.
My proposed change is this (or something like it, reword it as you will): Last chapter should be set to the final chapter number used.
P.S. This will probably be rejected, but I tried my darnedest to make a solid, logical argument for the change.
P.P.S. I'm still going to interpret the word "should" in the original rule as "not always" and I also consider extras as "full chapters." This is the loophole in the rule for the final chapter to be set at the last chapter number used in the volume. If the last chapter number is 35.5 (which is a full chapter), then that is the last chapter, not chapter 35. If you don't want this, then this loophole must be closed (my proposed change makes it clear, not ambiguous with the original rule). The second phrase of the original rule doesn't close the loophole due to the word "or" (which means one or the other, but not both) The extras, even if not numbered in the printed volume, are still "chapters" because (again) they are included in the volume. (I suppose a fix could be done by splitting the original rule into two sub-rules. The first sub-rule would be the second phrase, and the second being the first phrase with the prefix "and if not." This would get rid of the "or" and the "should." IOW, it would be 3.4.7 Last Chapter; 3.4.7.1 Is set to the final chapter as marked by the author if possible; 3.4.7.2 Is set to the final full chapter's number, if not possible. Even 3.4.7.2 is ambiguous since I consider extras as full chapters.)
P.P.P.S. I have Asperger Syndrome and I look at a lot of phrases as being literal and absolute. If the word "should" is used, that means to me "not always" and I don't have to "obey" the phrase after "should." If the words "full chapter" is used, then that means any sub-chapters or extras that have a chapter number assigned is a "full chapter." And if the word "or" is used, that means means I can do one or the other, just not both.
To me, this rule is completely ambiguous as I will explain below in the P.P.S.
My suggestion is to modify this rule slightly. I believe the end icon should be the final "chapter" (I use quotes to differentiate what is said above). What I mean is the final item that has a chapter number to it, for example, extras. Extras don't formally have a chapter number assigned to them by the publisher, but MangaDex must assign a "chapter number" to the extras so they can be counted in the correct place as part of a volume. Because of this, I count he extra's chapter numbers as part of the volume and the volume doesn't end until after the last extra is counted.
As it stands now, the extras in the final volume are discounted as opposed to the extras in the previous volumes. My argument is why should the extras in the previous volumes be included in the story and the extras in the final volume not? (There is some leeway because of the word "should" in the rule.) Isn't this discrimination against the final volume's extras? My view is that the extras are part of the story somehow, otherwise the mangaka wouldn't have added them.
Let's look at an analogy using fictional volumes 1, 2, and 3 each with 4 chapters plus extras.
Picture this: each volume is a section of road. Let's say that the story is the tarred portion and the extras the concrete portion. Based on this this is how the road would look: tarred, concrete (volume 1), tarred, concrete (volume 2), tarred, concrete (volume 3). Lets add a brick wall (the end icon) at the end to indicate the end of the final volume (the back cover). Looking at this, each concrete portion of the road is just as much part of the road as the tarred portion. By placing the brick wall before the final concrete part of the road, means (to me) that that the final concrete portion of the road will never be driven over. Anything beyond the brick wall just doesn't exist (which should mean the back cover of the final volume).
Let's suppose there is an epilogue (a lot of mangas have that). Usually, the chapter before the epilogue is labeled in the volume as "final" or "fin" at the beginning of the chapter or the end. Technically, the epilogue is not an "extra," but still very much part of the story. Even the mangaka's notes are part of the story because that is where s/he explains what s/he did and why s/he did it. And, many times, the mangaka puts the word "bye" at the end of his/her notes which also means "the end." There are also chapters where the mangaka puts "fin" at the end of every chapter (or sub-story). The original rule, as it stands, does not take that inconsistency into account due to the second phrase of the rule.
My proposed change is this (or something like it, reword it as you will): Last chapter should be set to the final chapter number used.
P.S. This will probably be rejected, but I tried my darnedest to make a solid, logical argument for the change.
P.P.S. I'm still going to interpret the word "should" in the original rule as "not always" and I also consider extras as "full chapters." This is the loophole in the rule for the final chapter to be set at the last chapter number used in the volume. If the last chapter number is 35.5 (which is a full chapter), then that is the last chapter, not chapter 35. If you don't want this, then this loophole must be closed (my proposed change makes it clear, not ambiguous with the original rule). The second phrase of the original rule doesn't close the loophole due to the word "or" (which means one or the other, but not both) The extras, even if not numbered in the printed volume, are still "chapters" because (again) they are included in the volume. (I suppose a fix could be done by splitting the original rule into two sub-rules. The first sub-rule would be the second phrase, and the second being the first phrase with the prefix "and if not." This would get rid of the "or" and the "should." IOW, it would be 3.4.7 Last Chapter; 3.4.7.1 Is set to the final chapter as marked by the author if possible; 3.4.7.2 Is set to the final full chapter's number, if not possible. Even 3.4.7.2 is ambiguous since I consider extras as full chapters.)
P.P.P.S. I have Asperger Syndrome and I look at a lot of phrases as being literal and absolute. If the word "should" is used, that means to me "not always" and I don't have to "obey" the phrase after "should." If the words "full chapter" is used, then that means any sub-chapters or extras that have a chapter number assigned is a "full chapter." And if the word "or" is used, that means means I can do one or the other, just not both.
R - up to scan groups if they want to publish the extras, because of that the actual last chapter is labelled "end", in some cases, the groups put in the effort to change the "end" chapter to the last extra, but since the publisher usually ignores extras as "full chapters", they don't always feel the need to do this nice extra work.
