Author |
Message |
Registered: March 24, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 1,230 |
| Posted: | | | | The rules state to italicise and/or bold any words in the overview that are shown in that way on the case but, if the overview is entirely in upper or lower case, to capitalise accordingly. If the overview is entirely in bold, should it be contributed as such? It seems daft to have an overview entirely in bold or italics, just as it would be in upper case. |
|
Registered: May 19, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 6,730 |
| Posted: | | | | May seem daft to do so, but a voicy group decided that it would be to complicated to handle the bolds and italics just as a method to highlight the highlighted passages of an overview. So now we use bold where bold is to be seen and get a problem if some passages in a bold text are even more bold. | | | It all seems so stupid, it makes me want to give up! But why should I give up, when it all seems so stupid?
Registrant since 05/22/2003 |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 17,334 |
| Posted: | | | | This was discussed at length in the rules committee forum... over multiple threads. It came to Ken having to decide how it needed to be for the main database... and his decision was exactly as on case... so that means if the entire overview was in bold and/or Italic then the entire overview needs to be bold and/or italic in the profile as well. | | | Pete |
|
Registered: April 3, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 1,998 |
| Posted: | | | | Is it my contribution of Bridge on the River Kwai? i have no problem resubmitting without that part of the profile if you wish |
|
Registered: March 24, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 1,230 |
| Posted: | | | | Yes, it was your Kwai contribution that prompted this - I can't say that it is bold because there is no point of reference. If certain words were in bold then you can tell but because the whole thing is the same then then, whilst the text may look thick, that would be the typeface rather than bold. |
|
Registered: April 3, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 1,998 |
| Posted: | | | | There was really no need to vote No to it as i said i have no problem resubmitting |
|
Registered: March 24, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 1,230 |
| Posted: | | | | Sorry, I voted no before I checked this and saw you had replied. Thanks for resubmitting. |
|
Registered: April 3, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 1,998 |
| Posted: | | | | No problem |
|
Registered: March 14, 2007 | Posts: 5,734 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting Nosferatu: Quote: The rules state to italicise and/or bold any words in the overview that are shown in that way on the case but, if the overview is entirely in upper or lower case, to capitalise accordingly. If the overview is entirely in bold, should it be contributed as such? It seems daft to have an overview entirely in bold or italics, just as it would be in upper case. There are tens of thousands of fonts, and while CAPITALIZATION can usually be recognized quite easy, this does not apply to italization and still less to boldization. Of course I don't know the broad agreement from the Contribution Rules Committee. But in my view a font cannot be bold without the possibility of comparing it with the un-bold. If an overview is written in only one font style, there is a good deal of evidence first that this is the regular font style. Love, bbbbb | | | Don't confuse while the film is playing with when the film is played. [Ken Cole, DVD Profiler Architect] |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 13,202 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting goblinsdoitall: Quote: May seem daft to do so, but a voicy group decided that it would be to complicated to handle the bolds and italics just as a method to highlight the highlighted passages of an overview. So now we use bold where bold is to be seen and get a problem if some passages in a bold text are even more bold. Let's set the record straight, this was not decided by a voicy group, it was decided by Ken. In addition, while I agree that we should not enter an all bold font...as there is no point of reference...and italic or slanted font is easy to spot and should be entered that way. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever. There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom. Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand. The Centauri learned this lesson once. We will teach it to them again. Though it take a thousand years, we will be free. - Citizen G'Kar | | | Last edited: by TheMadMartian |
|
Registered: March 14, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 6,744 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting bbbbb: Quote: There are tens of thousands of fonts, and while CAPITALIZATION can usually be recognized quite easy, this does not apply to italization and still less to boldization.
Of course I don't know the broad agreement from the Contribution Rules Committee. But in my view a font cannot be bold without the possibility of comparing it with the un-bold.
If an overview is written in only one font style, there is a good deal of evidence first that this is the regular font style.
Love, bbbbb I basically wanted to write exactly the same. If the entire text looks the same how can you say it's "bold"? From Wikipedia: Quote: In typography, emphasis is the exaggeration of words in a text with a font in a different style from the rest of the text—to emphasise them. (bolding by me ) | | | Karsten DVD Collectors Online
| | | Last edited: by DJ Doena |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Posts: 2,759 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting DJ Doena: Quote: If the entire text looks the same how can you say it's "bold"? You can't! All you can see is a heavy font. You can't know if it is set in a bold style or not. |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Posts: 2,759 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting Unicus69: Quote: In addition, while I agree that we should not enter an all bold font...as there is no point of reference...and italic or slanted font is easy to spot and should be entered that way. If there was used a slanted font, we should not add the italic attribute to the text, since we do not enter font information. We can only enter text style attributes. |
|
Registered: June 12, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 2,665 |
| Posted: | | | | | | | Bad movie? You're soaking in it! |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 13,202 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting RHo: Quote: Quoting Unicus69:
Quote: In addition, while I agree that we should not enter an all bold font...as there is no point of reference...and italic or slanted font is easy to spot and should be entered that way. If there was used a slanted font, we should not add the italic attribute to the text, since we do not enter font information. We can only enter text style attributes. If memory serves, most of the people involved in the discussions, disagree with you. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever. There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom. Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand. The Centauri learned this lesson once. We will teach it to them again. Though it take a thousand years, we will be free. - Citizen G'Kar |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 2,394 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting Unicus69: Quote: Quoting RHo:
Quote: Quoting Unicus69:
Quote: In addition, while I agree that we should not enter an all bold font...as there is no point of reference...and italic or slanted font is easy to spot and should be entered that way. If there was used a slanted font, we should not add the italic attribute to the text, since we do not enter font information. We can only enter text style attributes.
If memory serves, most of the people involved in the discussions, disagree with you. That's the way I remember it, too, Unicus. | | | Another Ken (not Ken Cole) Badges? We ain't got no badges. We don't need no badges. I don't have to show you any stinking badges. DVD Profiler user since June 15, 2001 |
|