| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 1,242 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting northbloke: Quote:
Quoting snarbo:
Quote:
That's all right until somebody decides it's H/B/C instead of H//BC
Steve
No, that's the point - if someone decides H//BC should be H/B/C they can change it in their database and it won't affect anyone elses! No more ping-ponging of profiles or daft discussions in the forums about Zsa Zsa Gabor!
And conversely, if you download a profile where someone has created an actor parsed as H/B/C (assuming this actor doesn't already exist in your database) all you need to do is change the sort name to reflect H//BC and your entire database is fixed - any subsequent profiles you download would link to the same actor with the same sorting. According to your suggestion we would enter as a name H//BC sorted as BC, H but if somebody else parses differently you will get H/B/C sorted as C, H/B entered into the online credits they still would not be linked, so where's the difference between what you are proposing and what we have now? Steve |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Please stop using HBC as an example. I think it is a red herring designed to simply throw the whole discussion into confusion. Try doing the same thing with somebody little known or unknown. Its easy to use the argument when dealing with well-known personalities, it becomes less so when dealing people who are not so well-known or perhaps virtually unknown. Pop Quiz, Hot shots,  I will provide my examples again and some of you know the answer, so you can't play along.  Lavaun Vondale Elzay Lavonne Vondale Elzay Magly Those of you in Europe who haven't played along before...parse them for me and explain your rationale. Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video | | | | Last edited: by Winston Smith |
|
| Registered: March 15, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 5,459 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Giga Wizard: Quote:
I don't think this will help the program speed with one big name field, specialy for the large collection users. Now the program is fast on searches, we just all have to follow the rules. And even with one field the problems want go away. Li Gong <> Gong Li, José <> Jose. Entering cast & crew, the automated search parameters, ... and a lot of other problems the programmer has to deal with. It works fine now. Actually one of those problems would go away Name: Gong Li Sort Name: Gong, Li As far as I'm aware that's all the people who want asian names want to happen: for her to be sorted with the Gs, not the Ls. Because there are no first/middle/last fields anymore there are no more arguments about family names or given names as they all go in the same field and in the order that is culturally correct: Gong Li (her most commonly credited name). José <> Jose on the other hand, is not a parsing problem. |
|
| Registered: March 15, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,459 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
Those of you in Europe who haven't played along before...parse them for me and explain your rationale.
Skip Who cares? That's the point! As you have your own sort name field you can parse it any way you like without affecting anyone else's database! |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 4,596 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting northbloke: Quote:
Quoting snarbo:
Quote:
That's all right until somebody decides it's H/B/C instead of H//BC
Steve
No, that's the point - if someone decides H//BC should be H/B/C they can change it in their database and it won't affect anyone elses! No more ping-ponging of profiles or daft discussions in the forums about Zsa Zsa Gabor!
And conversely, if you download a profile where someone has created an actor parsed as H/B/C (assuming this actor doesn't already exist in your database) all you need to do is change the sort name to reflect H//BC and your entire database is fixed - any subsequent profiles you download would link to the same actor with the same sorting. That's too much work for large collections with thousands of actors/crew. I'd spend the rest of my life just to keep up with sort changes and linking. I'd have to give up contributing  . | | | | My WebGenDVD online Collection |
|
| Registered: March 15, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,459 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting snarbo: Quote:
entered into the online credits they still would not be linked, so where's the difference between what you are proposing and what we have now?
Steve no, because the sort name does not get included in the profile submission. "Helena Bonham Carter" would still link to "Helena Bonham Carter". For the purposes of linking the sort name would be ignored. There would be no H/B/C and H//BC in the database anymore, only one HBC with all profiles linked. |
|
| Registered: March 15, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,459 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting 8ballMax: Quote:
That's too much work for large collections with thousands of actors/crew. I'd spend the rest of my life just to keep up with sort changes and linking. I'd have to give up contributing . What sort changes? As I said earlier most of the work could be done automatically. At the most, you'd have to make the odd correction now and again - we're not talking manually changing thousands of entries! |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 1,242 |
| | Posted: | | | | Regardless. I was taught that when designing and creating a Database when using people's name in the DB there should always be at least TWO FIELDS for the name. Surname (Family name) Christian name (given).
As far as I know this has always been the case.
Steve |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting northbloke: Quote:
Quoting skipnet50:
Quote:
Those of you in Europe who haven't played along before...parse them for me and explain your rationale.
Skip
Who cares? That's the point! As you have your own sort name field you can parse it any way you like without affecting anyone else's database! North: Part of the argument that has been put forth in this regard is ACCURACY. If this is about accuracy and not personal preference, then parse it as requested. Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,394 |
| | Posted: | | | | In my experience, limited as it is (2,923 owned, 3,491 wishlist) by far and away the majority of names are two names, first and last. The number of names that involve all fields are few -- and within that few the number of names that are "troublesome" are fewer still. So to me, a move to go to a single name field and a sortfield is a case of throwing the baby out with the bath water. Especially when the sortfield is private as the sorttitle field is. When I download a profile today, I get about 90% of what I want in the cast/crew list. I only see the proposal as creating more work than I have to do now -- and, selfish as I am, I am not in favor of it. | | | Another Ken (not Ken Cole)
Badges? We ain't got no badges. We don't need no badges. I don't have to show you any stinking badges.
DVD Profiler user since June 15, 2001 |
|
| Registered: March 15, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,459 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting snarbo: Quote:
Regardless. I was taught that when designing and creating a Database when using people's name in the DB there should always be at least TWO FIELDS for the name. Surname (Family name) Christian name (given).
As far as I know this has always been the case.
Steve True, but can you see the people on here ever agreeing to what they should be? And my music collection software only uses one field for the name with a separate sort field. Mind you, that has to deal with groups as well as individuals... |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 4,596 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting northbloke: Quote:
Quoting 8ballMax:
Quote:
That's too much work for large collections with thousands of actors/crew. I'd spend the rest of my life just to keep up with sort changes and linking. I'd have to give up contributing .
What sort changes? As I said earlier most of the work could be done automatically. At the most, you'd have to make the odd correction now and again - we're not talking manually changing thousands of entries! Gotcha. I'd just have to change those whose sorting isn't to my liking. I'd have to see it in action to know for sure if it would suit me. | | | | My WebGenDVD online Collection |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting northbloke: Quote:
Quoting skipnet50:
Quote:
Those of you in Europe who haven't played along before...parse them for me and explain your rationale.
Skip
Who cares? That's the point! As you have your own sort name field you can parse it any way you like without affecting anyone else's database! That is true LOCALLY, it is not true for the online. Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
| Registered: March 15, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,459 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting 8ballMax: Quote:
Gotcha. I'd just have to change those whose sorting isn't to my liking. I'd have to see it in action to know for sure if it would suit me. If you like, try the music cataloguing software I use: Catraxx - that uses the same system I'm proposing here, 1 name field, 1 sort field. If I remember rightly it even comes with a sample database so you can have a play without having to enter any data first - though I could be wrong about that. |
|
| Registered: March 15, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,459 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
That is true LOCALLY, it is not true for the online.
Skip Exactly my point - the sort name would be LOCALLY held, not affecting the online at all. And accuracy would also not be a problem any more as parsing would no longer be an issue. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 1,242 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting northbloke: Quote:
Quoting 8ballMax:
Quote:
Gotcha. I'd just have to change those whose sorting isn't to my liking. I'd have to see it in action to know for sure if it would suit me.
If you like, try the music cataloguing software I use: Catraxx - that uses the same system I'm proposing here, 1 name field, 1 sort field.
If I remember rightly it even comes with a sample database so you can have a play without having to enter any data first - though I could be wrong about that. This being the case why not just use CATVids, you can your one name field then? Steve |
|