I am just trying to get some clarification on disc id's.  This has started popping up more and more in the database voting and before it gets out of control (if it is wrong), I would like to start a discussion on it and possibly update the rules if that is needed.

Currently the rules state:

Quote:

Add disc information for each disc using a DVD-ROM drive. Use the default descriptions wherever possible; do not change "Main Feature" to the film’s title. Use one description per disc. If a disc is double-sided, there is only one description for that disc.

    * Do not enter each side as a separate disc.
    * If a movie is on both sides of a disc in Widescreen and Pan & Scan versions, identify this by adding (A: W/S; B: P&S) or (A: P&S; B: W/S). Make sure that you have the correct order.

Now that the field seems to be expanded, should we be replacing WS with Widescreen, FF with Full Frame and P&S with Pan & Scan?

This is not the way I read the rules, but it seems as though this rule was simply carried over and nothing has been done on it yet.

Old Style

Quote:
Description Side A   Info Side A
Main Feature            RINGER_PS[FC14F0D30682F897] SL
(A: F/S B: W/S)
Description Side B         Info Side B
                                RINGER_WS[0CE32602EFC73CD5] SL

New Style

Quote:
Description Side A Info Side A
Main Feature            RINGER_PS[FC14F0D30682F897] SL
(Pan & Scan)
Description Side B      Info Side B
Main Feature              RINGER_WS[0CE32602EFC73CD5] SL
(Widescreen)

The rules still need to be updated to support the new 3.0+ features. I already updated all mine "P&S"s and "W/S"s and flippers to "Main Feature (Part 1)" and "Main Feature (Part 2)" and everybody agreed so I am pretty sure this is the way to do it.

Everybody can get access. You just have to ask Gerri for an invite.

This is for clarification of the rules we have. And not for new proposals to the rule. I'm just saying it how it is. Feel free to discuss this here, but it is off-topic.

Quoting pompel9:

Quote:
Everybody can get access. You just have to ask Gerri for an invite.

This is for clarification of the rules we have. And not for new proposals to the rule. I'm just saying it how it is. Feel free to discuss this here, but it is off-topic.

I know that anybody can request access, how can it be off topic in the contribution discussion forum?

And as for your point to Martin re not using forum discussions that's not entirely true, whether we like it or not.

Quoting Martin_Zuidervliet:

Quote:
The rules still need to be updated to support the new 3.0+ features. I already updated all mine "P&S"s and "W/S"s and flippers to "Main Feature (Part 1)" and "Main Feature (Part 2)" and everybody agreed so I am pretty sure this is the way to do it.

I agree that the rules need to be updated for the 3.0 features... that is why I posted here to find out what direction things will be going.

The simple fact that

Quote:
everybody agreed so I am pretty sure this is the way to do it.

does NOT make it a rule and these contributions should NOT be submitted until such time as it IS a rule.

As to pompel9's point, that is what I am trying to do... clarify an existing rule.  And point out that the rule has NOT changed yet.  Once it does, the rules page will be updated.  I am not asking that a rule be changed -- I realize this would not be the location for that.

Quoting t001z:

Quote:
The simple fact that

Quote:
everybody agreed so I am pretty sure this is the way to do it.

does NOT make it a rule and these contributions should NOT be submitted until such time as it IS a rule.

As to pompel9's point, that is what I am trying to do... clarify an existing rule.  And point out that the rule has NOT changed yet.  Once it does, the rules page will be updated.  I am not asking that a rule be changed -- I realize this would not be the location for that.

By your same argument then, we should also leave all the disc info in the Side A area for dual sided discs and not move the Side B info across to the new description field because the rules say that we can only have one description per disc and that that should be: "(A: W/S; B: P&S)" or "(A: P&S; B: W/S)". That would clearly be nonsense.

The only reason those labels are abbreviated to "W/S" and "P&S" is because of the field limitations we had in Version 2.x. Expanding them to "Widescreen" and "Pan & Scan" now that we have the full room is no different to expanding a studio name or an Edition to its full length because of the new character length of the field in 3.x.