I don't have any agenda whatsoever. That's what you make of my post, not what I wrote. I can only take note that you did not answer my two questions, namely:

1. Are you, or are you not, in favor of switching naming field to a single field instead of three, seeing how that would suffice to enter data as seen on-screen?

2. Why are there parsing rules for western names and not for Asian names? Was that an oversight or at the time due to a lack of knowledge in that area?

You might recall that 4 years ago, I wasn't here yet and as such I haven't seen the rules taking shape (or DVDP for that matter). I just would like to know, from a user who helped create those rules, what the reasons were and what your personal view on the matter is.

All the other blahblah about twisting things, hidden agendas, and dubious remarks about Asian people don't help advance one bit. It only adds more venom to a forum that is already drowning in it.  I want to understand the rules, not just the general idea which I know to be entering credits as seen on screen, but the additional details in the rules.

Just give a concise answer to the point, that's all I'm asking.

Quoting Taro:

Quote:
I don't have any agenda whatsoever. That's what you make of my post, not what I wrote. I can only take note that you did not answer my two questions, namely:

1. Are you, or are you not, in favor of switching naming field to a single field instead of three, seeing how that would suffice to enter data as seen on-screen?

2. Why are there parsing rules for western names and not for Asian names? Was that an oversight or at the time due to a lack of knowledge in that area?

You might recall that 4 years ago, I wasn't here yet and as such I haven't seen the rules taking shape (or DVDP for that matter). I just would like to know, from a user who helped create those rules, what the reasons were and what your personal view on the matter is.

All the other blahblah about twisting things, hidden agendas, and dubious remarks about Asian people don't help advance one bit. It only adds more venom to a forum that is already drowning in it.  I want to understand the rules, not just the general idea which I know to be entering credits as seen on screen, but the additional details in the rules.

Just give a concise answer to the point, that's all I'm asking.

Then pay attention to what I am saying, my friend. There absolutely is no culture other than the data as it appears on the screen, it is that simple. I have said for 4 years that I want to see a system which will allow for your particular cultural wishes and that of the French and anyone else that can be accommodated. But, just keep in mind that at the core is simply the data as it appears On Screen, No ifs, no ands, no squirming and spinning, no culture...just D..A..T..A. I never dreamed that people would fail to understand this simplest of concepts, had I realized it, I probably would have suggested that Ken name the fields something other than  what they are. I don't care that the French say that it is François because of how they handle lower case, when the credit says Francois, I don't care that you think it should be Yun Fat Chow, when the credit says Chow Yun Fat and I would not care if someone said it is John Wayne, if the credit reads Wayne John. It is simply what the data says it is.

You claim want to hear the thoughts of one who was intimately involved in the Rules, then instead of listening and trying to undferstand, you insult me, you argue with me, you try and rationalize your argument. Culture of anyone has NOTHING to do with this, it is simply what the data says and how it APPEARS.

Maybe it is this kind of thing that has made IMDb the nightmare that it is from an accuracy viewpoint. Their users are allowed to run completely amuck and order the data anyway they wish, create whatever names they choose and so forth. I hear users say how good their cross system is, well I have news it isn't worth the powder it would take to blow it to Kingdom come and back, I am foreverfinding names that should be listed in the lingo Jim Smith as Joe Blow, yet the credit actually reads James Smith, so where the Jim Smith....Joe Blow (James Smith)... a fomus biological joke crosses my mind at this moment, something about elephants and rhinos       Even for all of our faults, Profiler is so far ahead of IMDb right now it is not even funny; though we have a long way to go.


Skip

I'd say the program calls them first and last name, so it should be done by order on screen. So long as we are consistent with what goes where for each name, it doesn't matter what's a given name and what's a family name. Or it wouldn't, if not for alphabetizing. This needs a program level fix.

Quoting ya_shin:

Quote:
Quoting synner_man:

Quote:
The one problem I have with your example is that the name would likely be credited as Park Yun Young, in other words, family name first.  That is the way the majority of Korean films are credited.  You would not switch it around just to match a western standard.  In other words, if it is credited as Park Yun Young, it is parsed as Park//Yun Young, not Yun Young//Park.

If I understand you right you would prefer that the name remain in the sequence as shown on screen, not assigned to the proper fields?

I asked a few Taiwanese friends once and they basically all agreed that they would feel their names better represented if assigned to the proper fields, rather than shown in the correct sequence. (so: Yun Young//Park for them).

Quoting Taro:

Quote:
2. Why are there parsing rules for western names and not for Asian names? Was that an oversight or at the time due to a lack of knowledge in that area?

I would say it was a mixture of not even thnking about it (I know I didn't) and not lack of knowledge (the team consisted of members from the US, the UK and Germany).

Why Skip repeatedly tries to dismount any effort to set up rules for this is a mystery to me. I have seen several attempts (at InoterVocative and here) and eventually gave up to participate as Skip's disruption made any reasonable discussion impossible.

Achim:

Had you ever thought that i view the other comments as disruptive. Particularly, when I have repeatedly (1)explained the concept and its simplicity AS CREDITED On Screen, (2)that I would support a plan to give the culture issue it's due as long as it does not interfere with the foundation of the system.

If you don't understand that is one thin, but keep your insulting "it's Skip's fault" remarks to yourself, because from my point of view you are the ones being disruptive and insulting. Ok, amigo. Gracias.

Let me offer a further thought. Since you don't care what i think, or what the philosophy was or even my own feelings, then why should I care about YOURS. Think about IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You have dismissed me for a long time, along with a few others, well let me teel you something it is not the World according to Achim, Skip, Taro, James, tim or anyone else. GOT IT.

Skip

One more thing, Achim, I would argue, because I know it is true for me, that you "overlooked" the culture issue was because you understood the premise and concept of As credited and the film credits, and recognized in that vein that culture should not be an issue because there is NO culture other than the film credits. We were both wrong on that score, concept and the premise remanisn very easy to understand, almost perfectly natural, but there are those who put culture first evidently.

I am sick and tired of this crap of "Skip, you are being disruptive and insulting me", thatb knife cuts both ways and if you think about it for a bit you might actually realize that it is the bad attitudes, insulting and combative behavior of others (who I won't bother to, and probably wouldn't have to name), along with their own disruptive comments...just might explain my hostility and why I am becoming less and less tolerant. As I have said before, it's a two way street, I am not6 going to ask anyone to walk down Skip Street but neither will I walk down YOUR Street, so we have to meet in the middle somewhere.

Boy am I angry. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Skip

Quoting Jubal:

Quote:
well let me teel you something it is not the World according to Achim, Skip, Taro, James, tim or anyone else. GOT IT.

Skip

I didn't even post. 

Well, since you mentioned me, I decided to post. 

Here's my reply to (1) the last comments I have seen from Ken on this subject and (2) the last time I saw you (as Dr Pavlov) deny that we considered Asian names on the first rules committee:

Quoting m.cellophane:

Quote:
Quoting Ken Cole:

Quote:
Surname is the intent.  If that will result in less confusion, it's an easy change for the next release.  The CLT does not parse names since it doesn't use the name field, only the display name.  So, in the case of an entry with Credited As, it uses that.  Without a Credited As entry it uses the full display name.

Note that the issue of Asian name parsing remains open.

Thank you. 

Quoting Ken Cole:

Quote:
I should be more clear.  The issue of Asian names is still open at present.  Please don't take my earlier statement as a directive to reprocess all Asian names in a new order.  The statement was made in answer to the question at hand, which is general name parsing.

Thank you. 

Quoting Dr Pavlov:

Quote:
James and Achim both were part of the original Rules writing team, both understood the objective and neither of them nor me, nor anyone else, ever thought about the asian name issue, personally, I, nievely, never believed it would be an issue since we were dealing with film credits.

We talked about it.

From the rules team chat transcripts:

[23:33] <***> Ahh... Asian names... Is that next? ;-)
[23:33] <***> yes

[23:42] <***> I am waiting for an explination of how to parse names that allows for "Max" "von Sydow" and doesn't single out Asians

[23:48] <***> If you want to allow for "von" and "Sir" and want to make Asian names different you need to carve 'em off special

[23:59] <***> When writing the whole Asian name, family name comes first...
[23:59] <***> that would be a translation problem then ***
[23:59] <***> BUT when identifying it by "bits" they identify their last name as the name that comes first
[23:59] <***> as a genealogist I see these all the time
[00:00] --- Thu Apr 28 2005
[00:00] <skipnet> I don't care about the culture issue ***, this is about Hollywood credits
[00:00] <***> most cultures list things like von as part of the last name
[00:01] <***> Frankly. I can't see it as anything but predjudice to accept Sir as part of the first name, and von as part of the last name and not respect the asian approach

[00:01] <skipnet> If I am in a Chinese film and the credit me as Net Skip 50 then that would be the way it gets entered
[00:01] jlproffitt joined #intervocative.
[00:02] <***> Skip, Hollywood doesn't say ANYTHING about parsing the name into 3 fields.  Everytime you go back to that well your position gets weaker
[00:02] <***> welcome James
[00:02] <jlproffitt> Hiya ***
[00:02] <***> (we are watching Skip and *** debate asian names)

[21:10] <***> seriously, there needs to be a little further clarification at the very least, its still a little lacking
[21:10] <***> I saw nothing to fix the asian names thread debacle

[21:22] <skipnet> *** this issue has to wait for the next version, it did not even show up on the radar til we were damn near finished
[21:23] <skipnet> Bu5t what *** wants to do is Yun Fat / Chow
[21:23] <***> and as I said, I think it should be that way too
[21:23] <***> but that's beside the point
[21:23] <skipnet> Which is obviously NOT as credited
[21:24] <skipnet> The let Mr. Chow put it in his contract that way
[21:24] <skipnet> or any other asian
[21:24] <***> if you're telling me that ken and IVS can't put one line of text into a set of rules that in still pretty much in progress, I can tell you now there is going to be a HUGE issue when the next verison is released
[21:24] <skipnet> They are not insisting that it be done differently
[21:26] <skipnet> What people do in their local Db is of no concern of mine, what they contribute is and I think As Credited was very clear when we put it in, in fact i did not even choose it, but it is clear to me and i believe any user what it means

[21:27] <***> the fact that there is such an argument about this should prove that despite what you think, it's not very clear
[21:28] <***> and the new version isn't much clearer
[21:28] <skipnet> *** I don't see any room for interpretation in As Credited, it means precisely what it says, you enter the data as it is credited, which means Chow / Yun Fat
[21:29] <skipnet> Tell me how it can be interpreted differently

[21:34] <***> the interpretation comes in the definition of first and last name.  Keep in mind that while I feel strongly one way, I'm writing this impartially.  The problem is does first mean the first printed name, or the given name.  Does last mean the final printed name, or the family name?  If you understand that the latter way, then the names are reversed, but read normally for that person.  If you read the former way, data entr>>
[21:35] <***> there are pros and cons to both ways skip

[21:54] <skipnet> So the choice is Chow / Yun / Fat or Chow / Yun Fat that is as credited, any user who chose the former I would PM and advise him that it should be Chow / Yu Fat

There's lots more, but suffice to say, we did discuss it.

Ken's response of "Surname is the intent" refers to the issue of whether "last name" = "surname" or "last name" = "last word" (as you have said in your 'word counting' and 'as shown on screen' statements). He went with surname, but left the issue open for Asian names. So while you are correct that the issue is open for Asian names, "last name" does equate to "surname" for other names.

Also remember that we enter names vertically as:
first
last
middle
And then we are given a local display choice of "first middle last" or "last, first middle". There is some discernment involved. While the online contribution comparison screens show names as "first middle last", that's a default. It's not as easy as "type what you see".

Just butting in my nose for a moment...

Skip, from user's viewpoint, entering the credits into the database is not quite as simple as you make it sound. We simply have to use cultural interpretation of names as it is - even without any complications introduced by Asian name parsing.

If every creditable name, in every contributable movie or television program, consisted of...

1 part (such as "Kerima" or "Annabelle"): we would have no problems entering the name exactly as on screen. We would use the first name field, and the two other fields would be obsolete.

2 parts (such as "John Wayne" or "Wayne John"): we would have no problems entering the name exactly as on screen, if not worrying about cultural interpretation. We would enter the part on the left to the first name field, and the part on the right to the last name field. The middle name field would be obsolete.

3 parts (such as Helena Bonham Carter): we already run into "difficulties" with names such as Lars Von Trier, Olivia De Havilland or Douglas Fairbanks Jr. They all consist of 3 parts, so we could still do everything the easy way - first part to the first name field, middle part to the middle name field and right part to the last name field. However, the rules tell us what to do with Lars Von Trier (Lars // Von Trier). That in itself is already cultural interpretation. We know (I suppose    ) that "Von" is part of the last name even if it is the middle part of the credit on screen. Regardless of parsing, we still enter what we see on screen. It would still look the same.

4 parts or more: we already have to use cultural interpretation, because we only have 3 name fields to use.

(I feel that all of the above is self-evident, so sorry if that all sounds condescending)

I used to be against the switch to one field credits, but I have changed my mind over the years. Yes, we would lose last name sorting, but I think the advantages in simplification outweigh that. There is really very limited number of variations how e.g. Yun Young Park could have been entered (obviously omitting typos), so if someone wants to find out what movies he/she has in the database with this actor, they most likely find all appearances by searching both "Yun Young Park" and "Park Yun Young", if one field credits was adopted to the system*.

*) edit: with common name (CLT) established for the actor

Based on m.cellophane's post, I'd say enter surnames in the last name field and given names in the first name field and use the credited as to make them display correctly.