Quoting RHo:

Quote:
Again, you have not chosen the labels used by the program. Or are you a programmer working for Invelos?

That does seem to be what he is inferring. His use of the words "we" and "programming" are very specific. Accordingly I've given the post a red arrow for a breach of the forum rule: Impersonating an Invelos employee

Quoting RHo:

Quote:

Interesting reading! This quote would support a "given name" and "surname" field. With a check box to reverse the order (e.g. for Asian names), we would have the perfect solution which allows sorting by surname.

If we drop sorting, the single name field would be the way to go.

That would require that Ken completely rewrites part of the program, though.
As long as the program is as it is now, it seems to me that the simplest solution would be to use the fields in a culturally neutral way, without attaching any special meanings to each of them. That means renaming them to #1, #2 and#3, at least in the Rules.
Enter names #1, 2 and 3 as on screen without having to wonder if it's a middle name or a last name, which is sometimes difficult or impossible to determine and leads to non linking credits because of different interpretations...
Let's keep it simple. If there are two names on screen, enter them in fields 1 and 3. If there are three names, use all the three fields (Aggie / Guerard / Rodgers). Do we *really* care if she considers "Guerard" her middle name or one of her last names? Let's call it name number two, and that's it. Sorting would still be active in the program on name  #3, regardless.
Like I said, I don't mean word counting, because articles and prefixes belong with the names they precede. "Robert De Niro" would always be Robert // De Niro, not Robert / De / Niro.

Quoting gardibolt:

Quote:
There's a "Contact" button on her website.  Why not just ask her, "Do you consider your last name to be "Rodgers" or "Guerard Rodgers"?" 

I'll do it if no one else has.

Please do, as both BFI and
IMDb list her under G (so Aggie // Guerard Rodgers).
According to the statements by our fellow US users, it's a personal choice altogether, so the person in question is the only authoritative source to decide this issue, and all polls, opinions etc. are completely irrelevant.

Quoting T!M:

Quote:
Quoting dee1959jay:

Quote:
According to the statements by our fellow US users, it's a personal choice altogether, so the person in question is the only authoritative source to decide this issue, and all polls, opinions etc. are completely irrelevant.

Which is exactly why this system doesn't work, as in most cases, the person in question won't weigh in. As such, basically EVERY name consisting of more than two pieces has separate, non-linking entries in the database. If I could name only one problem area in DVD Profiler that I'd like to see addressed, it's this one. We've been having these debates for years now, and still different people keep entering the same credits differently, and it's doesn't look like the situation will improve by itself. Whether we lose the middle name field, go back to a single name field altogether, relabel the field names or whatever - something needs to be done. I'm game for just about anything that gets everyone on the same page.

Can't agree more.

While I agree something needs to be done... I don't see how some of the choices mentioned will stop the parsing problems we are having here.

If we dropped the middle name field people still needs to know where to put that middle name/initial... if they don't know if it is an actual middle name or double last name we still have people putting names in the wrong field.

If we rename the fields once again... if people can't figure out if it is a middle name or or double last name we still have people putting names in the wrong field.

So I have to ask... how would either of those choices stop the names from being parsed wrong?

The single name field with rule of entering cast/crew exactly as seen in the credits is the only thing I can see that will actually solve all parsing problems... sure it comes at the cost of sorting by last name... but that is (IMO) worth ending the parsing problem.

Simply put... If people do not know where the middle name/initial belongs what difference does 2 instead of 3 fields make? and what difference will it make what we label the fields?

Sure we can research and document what name is what... but how far has that gotten us so far? You just can't easily research parsing online. Especially when there is no rules on how to have your name.

Quoting Addicted2DVD:

Quote:
While I agree something needs to be done... I don't see how some of the choices mentioned will stop the parsing problems we are having here.

If we dropped the middle name field people still needs to know where to put that middle name/initial... if they don't know if it is an actual middle name or double last name we still have people putting names in the wrong field.

If we rename the fields once again... if people can't figure out if it is a middle name or or double last name we still have people putting names in the wrong field.

So I have to ask... how would either of those choices stop the names from being parsed wrong?

The single name field with rule of entering cast/crew exactly as seen in the credits is the only thing I can see that will actually solve all parsing problems... sure it comes at the cost of sorting by last name... but that is (IMO) worth ending the parsing problem.

Simply put... If people do not know where the middle name/initial belongs what difference does 2 instead of 3 fields make? and what difference will it make what we label the fields?

Sure we can research and document what name is what... but how far has that gotten us so far? You just can't easily research parsing online. Especially when there is no rules on how to have your name.

Furthermore, none of the choices will actually allow proper linking.  Until we come up with unique cast/crew ID system, entering cast/crew exactly as seen in the credits or all this discussion about parsing is useless IMO.

Quoting T!M:

Quote:
Quoting dee1959jay:

Quote:
According to the statements by our fellow US users, it's a personal choice altogether, so the person in question is the only authoritative source to decide this issue, and all polls, opinions etc. are completely irrelevant.

Which is exactly why this system doesn't work, as in most cases, the person in question won't weigh in. As such, basically EVERY name consisting of more than two pieces has separate, non-linking entries in the database. If I could name only one problem area in DVD Profiler that I'd like to see addressed, it's this one. We've been having these debates for years now, and still different people keep entering the same credits differently, and it's doesn't look like the situation will improve by itself. Whether we lose the middle name field, go back to a single name field altogether, relabel the field names or whatever - something needs to be done. I'm game for just about anything that gets everyone on the same page.

Yes, I would agree with any system that makes parsing easier or even avoids it at all.
Any of such systems would be better than our present system based on "documentation". Like Pete said, "You just can't easily research parsing online. Especially when there is no rules on how to have your name."

Quoting surfeur51:

Quote:

I think this is not a problem since the cases where we cannot really know what is right name are very rare. Parsing works fine for thousands names. For this one, if the majority is for Annie/Guerard/Rodgers , let us decide that this is the name for online. In my local it will be Annie/Guerard Rodgers and that doesn't worry me only one second, since all my Annie/Guerard Rodgers will link correctly. Let us stop making fuss with nothing...

Cases may be somehow rare if you only think of Hollywood stars, but how do you parse three-piece Chinese, Spanish or Italian names, if you don't accept a standardised parsing? Are we supposed to document each and every parsing? Even that would not be enough, because there will always be different interpretations and diverging point of views. Are we going to make a poll for every three-piece name? And will all users accept the results of the poll? Is that even in the rules?