I personally agree with you, the E is clearly smaller than the rest of the name. In my opinion this would've been done to indicate how the name should be capitalised.

I thought the program was changed so that capitalization of names like this was localized; even if it's changed in an update, it stays the way it is in your profile.  There was constant ping-ponging of Jan de Bont and Le var Burton, and that ended when this change took effect.  Or did I dream this???? 

If such a change doesn't exist it should. Same with putting a , or . with names that have jr or sr like Harry Connick Jr

Quoting snarbo:

Quote:
The other annoying thing with names like this are the people who insist that it should be

Jan/De/Bont (Jan/de/Bont)

whereas I was taught name like this are

Jan//De Bont (Jan//de Bont)

Steve

Indeed, correct parsing is Jan // de Bont. It's the same with names containing "Van" (eg Gus // Van Sant) and "La" (eg Robia // La Morte).

Personally, I prefer the non-ping-ponging.

Quoting kdh1949:

Quote:
until the program is fixed

Argh!!!! The programs broke...the programs broke.  

Steve

Quoting T!M:

Quote:
Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
there is a program limitation here, hopefully to be fixed in 3.5.

As I have explained to you on multiple occasions before, there is NO such program limitation, so there's nothing to be fixed in this department. What you want here is the ability to have separate, non-linking co-existing entries for both Jan de Bont en Jan De Bont in your local database, which the program currently does not allow you to have: you have to pick one, and use "credited as" for the other variant. Which is how it should be - there really is nothing to "fix" here. On the contrary: Ken should do everything he can to eliminate pointless double entries for the same people, instead of letting us create even more of them!

And you have to pick ONE...why, Tim. Because the program has a limtation in its abi;lity to distinguish Upper and lower Case. ROFLMAO<shakes head> Now its not a big deal when you understand it, but DON'T try and make other users beliuev that this does not exist, we can all too easily document the inaccuracy of your statement.

Skip

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
And you have to pick ONE...why, Tim.

Because it's the one and only correct thing to do: Jan de Bont and Jan De Bont are one and the same person, so there's no need for separate entries. You use the "most-credited form" as the common name, and use "credited as" for when the person is credited with the other variant. I can't believe that after all this time, I still find myself having to explain the whole "credited as" system to you once more. IMHO, not allowing us to have separate, non-linking entries for both Jan de Bont and Jan De Bont in our local databases was a deliberate decision on Ken's part, which obviously doesn't need "fixing". If there's one thing we don't need, it's the ability to create even more double entries for the same people - instead we should be focussing on eliminating the existing ones.

Quote:
<shakes head> Now its not a big deal when you understand it, but DON'T try and make other users beliuev that this does not exist, we can all too easily document the inaccuracy of your statement.

<shakes head> Now it's not a big deal that you don't understand it, but DON'T try and make other users believe that a problem exists where there is none, we can all too easily document the inaccuracy of your statement.