Follow the Rule. This has been discussed, cussed and recussed endlessly. And it doesn't need more. It started out as take the title from the film but...there were those who wanted it from the cover because that is what is seen on the shelf. No more discussion...the Rule is what it is follow, do NOT ever apply personal preferences or interpretation, you can do that ALL you want locally.

My question for you is that you were obviously aware of the rule and the fact that it does not include any kind of provision to use OTHER than the Front Cover. So Why did you? The answer is probably along the lines of your definition of accuracy and because you wanted to do it.

Skip

I don't have a problem with the "title" field: it's the DVD title, not necessarily the film title. I do, however, still have a big problem with the "original title" field, specifically with the order of sources to get the "original title" from. Here's the rule: "Use the title from the copyright notice if available, otherwise from the film's credits." That is, IMHO, utterly ridiculous...

I'll give an example: here's a shot from the opening credits of 'CaddyShack', showing the one and only correct film title to be 'CaddyShack' (note the capital S):



On my U.S. region 1 DVD, though, the rules prohibit me from entering that title at all - not even in the "original title" field. Why? Because I have to take it from the "copyright notice" BEFORE looking at the film credits. And like the DVD's front cover, the copyright notice got it wrong, too. So the rules actually prohibit us from tracking the ACTUAL film title in one of the two available title fields - instead I have to leave the "original title" field empty.        Now here's the fun part: on a random R2-version of this DVD, the title is not mentioned in the copyright notice, and as a result, there I CAN go to the actual credits to retrieve 'CaddyShack' for the "original title" field. So I can track the film's title in a R2 profile, but not in the R1 profile?! I just don't get it.

The same applies to the original title of 'Good Morning Vietnam' - strangely it depends on what the copyright notice says, not what the film credits say.

And I do, of course: I take all my "titles" from the DVD cover, and all my "original titles" (if they're different, that is) from the film credits, and I have never ever run in to any problems yet. I just don't understand why the rules go to so much trouble to actually AVOID using the film's actual title as "original title". 

Quoting T!M:

Quote:
I just don't understand why the rules go to so much trouble to actually AVOID using the film's actual title as "original title". 

Probably because we'd end up with some users trying to cram ridiculous possessive credit titles into the original title field, just like they were doing to the Title field.

Quoting northbloke:

Quote:
Quoting T!M:

Quote:
I just don't understand why the rules go to so much trouble to actually AVOID using the film's actual title as "original title". 

Probably because we'd end up with some users trying to cram ridiculous possessive credit titles into the original title field, just like they were doing to the Title field.

Probably, yes, and I understand that (I'm decidedly not a fan of possessives). So I like how the rules refer to the copyright notice for determining whether a possessive is part of the title, but why on earth did "normal", possessive-less titles have to be dragged into this? "Take the title from the cover and the original title from the credits" (coupled with a separate note about possessives) is perfectly simple and essentially captures everything we're after. Instead, we inexplicably ended up with something which quite often prohibits us from tracking the actual title from the credits, but instead orders the original title field to remain empty. Okay, I've locked all my titles a long time ago, so I shouldn't really care. I've just never been able to understand why it was done this way.

Wow. I wasn't expecting to start up a debate! I was just hoping for an answer thinking that the regulars all understood some reasoning that I had not yet heard outside of the rules.

Obviously I am not alone in this debatable issue

Quoting Blair76:

Quote:
Wow. I wasn't expecting to start up a debate! I was just hoping for an answer thinking that the regulars all understood some reasoning that I had not yet heard outside of the rules.

Obviously I am not alone in this debatable issue

You can ask the time in this forum and start an argument!   

OK

Skip