I like the feature how it is now in DVDP.... 
And let's keep it this way.... 

Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
Quoting gardibolt:

Quote:

Or more precisely,

Lon Chaney (birth year 1906)=Lon Chaney Jr=Lon Chaney Jr.=Lon Chaney, Jr.=Creighton Chaney

Sr. was never credited as such during his lifetime, but if he is so credited in a compilation of some kind (or in recreated title cards for a silent) then we would have:

Lon Chaney (birth year 1883)=Lon Chaney Sr=Lon Chaney Sr.=Lon Chaney, Sr.

Both birth dates on at least these two are well documented.

Problem is, as I understand it John wants to completely eliminate BYs.

You don't understand $#(&, because if you really thought about what I said, you'd know what I was talking about.

Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
Quoting Rifter:

Quote:
Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
Quoting Rifter:

Quote:
It can't?  Why can't it?  Is that just your opinion, or it is based on programming experience with databases?

We're waiting.  Explain how it would work.

I already did that, and so did Skip.  Close your mouth long enough to see the screen and maybe you'll be able to read something.

Please indulge us imbeciles and explain it just one more time.

How does the alias system deal with the two different Kevin Smith's without using BYs?

Just answer the question John instead of claiming that it has been answered.

No, I'm not playing your stupid games.  You aren't going to create a red herring and make me the fall guy.

I explained it twice in this thread, in detail, and in plain English.  Go back and read it.  You guys keep saying it won't work, but you haven't had come up with a reason WHY.  I laid out my objections quite clearly, and I'm not some puppet you can jerk around at your leisure.  You gave me a ration of crap for objecting to the way it was set up in the other thread, so I took it hear and made my case to Ken.  Now you're pulling the same crap here trying to make it look as if I'm attacking Ken.  I'm through talking to you, because you don't listen anyway.

Why should Ken have to do that? If John is this super database designer and programmer, why doesn't he write his own program? Or a plugin? Why doesn't he spell out his plan to the finest detaiil?

All John seems to want to do is whine and call Hal names. All Hal is doing is asking what others want to know.

If one doesn't like features of a program, one finds a new program.


Edit:Fixed the spelling of Hal's name.

Alright, John.

I don't know what game you think I am trying to play here.  I simply want to understand the entire proposal and how it would work so that I and others can properly evaluate it.

Since you refuse to explain it for us, I will take a shot at it, and perhaps you would be willing to nod yes or shake your head no; or maybe say "you're getting warmer", or "you're getting colder".

Please do not accuse me of trying to put words in your mouth! 

So here goes.

Kind of gleaning from everything that I recall, your proposal for the "alias solution" also includes the use of arabic numerals for actors with the same name.

These numbers are to be generated by whom?

Guess on my part:  The system itself generates the number when you tell it that you have a duplicate of an existing actor name.  Let me know if that is close.

Assuming my last statement to be accurate, how does the user know, when they are entering a cast list, which of the two same named actors (except one has the number 1 after it) is which?  How do they determine which one to put in the current profile they are working on?

My next guess to my last question (this is fun, isn't it):  While entering the cast list, Ken can add the ability to see all the films that the current actor appears in on the fly.  The user can then determine based on their knowledge of the actor's career which one to pick.  Am I getting warmer or colder?

But, then,  what if the user's local database doesn't contain any other movies for the said actors?  How do they pick the right one?

Gee, I'm stumped.  I guess I've asked myself too many questions and can't remember my own answers.

As you can see, just as you and a certain other user think that Ken's solution is half-baked, it is not quite as simple to come up with a solution that addresses every scenario as you seem to think.  Of course, you may have an answer to all of these questions, but unfortunately we (and more importantly Ken) will never know, because you aren;t going to play my silly game.

Too bad you're not talking to me anymore.

I guess we'll just have to settle for my answers. 

I don't really have anything to add to this thread, as the original poster seems not open to discuss more details aboiut his suggestion, even though asked by several people.

I will say, however, that I do not support the motion to put the features on hold.


Thanks for update, Gerri. Looking forward to see what you guys will come up with.