Lars:

The important thing to remember is that nothing is EVER going to perfect. But as Ken noted it is about the film credits not ultimate accuracy. If it were about ultimate accuracy then the previous comment would be correct and every user could fly off in his own directoion and Contribute anything he wanted citing ultimate accuracy, where does that lead to...IMDb and accuracy of near ZERO.

There are going to be exceptions such as "ß" which have no direct corresponding English character, just as is true for those using Asian characters IF the program could accept them, there a cyrillic characters which are also problematic. I don't see this as a big issue, maybe this is because I am familiar with multiple languages, "ß" poses no challenge for me, I know it is SS, should I ever see it in film credits. Since I haven't seen "ß" used in any credits I haven't even looked to see if it is recognized by the Program.<shrugs> IF the program recognizes "ß", then you know what my answer would be, I presume.

We can only try and adapt the program, in some cases the best that we can given the limitations that are currently in existence. I have seen numerous films in German and I can'tsay that I have ever seen "ß" used, but that perhaps could be explained by one set of credits for Germans and one set for prints that are shown elsewhere...I don't know. Hollywood typically doesn't do that... but we all know what a PITA they are.

One thing that I realized years ago when I started on this and that Ken has even commented was keep it simple, which I did. I also learned to never say never and try to keep things broadly-based. Which means in this case list the data as you see it on screen PERIOD, interpretations and adjustments are done in some other form, in this case through CA. When I setup my Profile for "Atonement", I didn't cry about adjusting things to English standards, I simply copied the data that I saw, accents and all, it really is not hard...unless....

Skip

I don't know why, Hal. I do! It's very simple.

As to your comment on the linking system, my opinon hasn't changed, and in fact has been reinforced by shortcomings which have been found. And i agree with you there should be NO priority name chosen or using your example.

Lon Chaney, Jr.=Lon Chaney Jr AND Lon Chaney which is the current system

Lon Chaney Jr = Lon Chaney = Lon Chaney, Jr. has a couple of minor issues that Ken has mentioned, such as the priority is better at one offs, but compared to the major issues it raises that is more than offset.

BUT that's another story and another discussion for another day.

Skip

The statements Ken made does not change anything for me, as I always have been tracking real names instead of the most credited form in my local database. I refuse to take DVD Profiler's red pill.

Ken: many thanks for this "definitive" clarification!

Quoting Ken Cole:

Quote:

No, there are no special English rules to apply.  Since "é" has a corresponding "É", simple capital conversion is all that's required.  If the character used in the all-caps name is "É", convert it to "é" as needed to create mixed case.  If the character used in all-caps is "E", convert it to "e" as needed to create mixed case.

OK, English rules it is - or as Microsoft calls them these days "Invariant" (they do not pretend they where neutral, but do promise they do not change according to the cultural settings the application is running under).

Notice I am not trying to say you should not use English rules, I am just trying to say that you should not pretend you are not doing it. Personally I prefer English rules over any attempt to make them "neutral" if we have to use the same rules for all names - after all, I would not appreciate if the introduction of Unicode support would mean we had to remove the dot over all the "i"s converted to lowercase from "I".

I still do not understand "ß" though - Skip talks about it, but he is refering to converting ß to SS when converting to uppercase, which makes sense - yet it is basically impossible to determine if SS should be ss or ß when converting to lowercase, so why do we have an exception for this when we do not allow E to é? Wouldn't it be simpler simply sticking to the rules 1) and 2) I listed earlier, without adding complexity in rule 3)?

Yes, I know I appear to be a pain in a certain body part because it really is appears very simple, but the unfortunate affect of 8 years as the leading L10N/I18N expert in a rather big software company meant I had to take the red pill when it come to these issues to avoid being beaten up by the translator sitting next to me. And I spend a lot of time stuffing the red pill down the throat of developers who really prefered the blue pill - with these issues, ignorance is truly bliss.

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
They aren't issues anymore, lars.

It seems the rules are indeed getting clearer, besides the odd "ß" exception that I really do not see the need for and would recommend is dropped again. I just randomly picked "ß" as an example to show how I understood the rules while I could as well have picked "É", and suddently we had an exception.

However the text in the actual rules should specify what is ment by "standard capitalization rules". When Gerri said we should use the rules of the language/country the crew member was from, we all (including you) thought it involved accents, so when the meaning of "standard capitalization rules" isn't explained in the rules, people will continue to read it the wrong way.

Quote:

The system is very simple, it always has been, it is only difficult for those who wish to make it so.

The rulers have are ambigious. If you care to read my post instead of assuming I am here to destroy the database, kill your firstborn, and whatnot, you will realize that I am asking two things:
1) To have clarified I understood the rules correctly.
2) To have the text in the rules updated.

Remember that you only understanding the simple parts of a concept does not mean the concept is simple. Once my knowledge was simple based on being able to speak 3 languages and understand 6 and back then I would see the situation pretty much as you do now. I happened to get a job where I had to learn more details, and I had the co-workers who could supply the information I needed (professionel translators). Sorry, but knowing multiple languages simply isn't enough to understand this fully. Remember several of the people you argued with know multiple languages as well). If people with other languages as their native language tells you the rules are ambigious, why fight it instead of simply working for clearer rules?

Quote:

How many times did I explain all of this to you and everyody else, Lars.

You did it many many times, and we understood you perfectly - and I certainly also recognized it was a valid interpretation of the rules. Unfortunately you failed two things:
1) Actually read what arguments we made. You just repeated "as credited" while both the discussed interpretations where "as credited" depending on how "standard capitalization rules" is interpreted.
2) Realize you are simply a user. You trying to explain something means nothing more than someone else trying to explain something to you. It might be hard for you to accept, but unless someone from Invelos states otherwise you are simply a user like everyone else.

Quote:

I even attempted to craft q compromise position so that the  cultural issue cold be addressed.

Sorry, this is as irrelevant as if any other user try to draft compromises. You are just a user. As long as the rules are ambigious, you should not accuse people from trying to destroy the database, impose personal preferences etc, if they have good reason to beleive their data is according to the rules.

Quote:

But you andothers were no interested in a compromise.

As long as the rules are ambigious, they are ambigious, and my problem with your statements was your constant claims others where trying to destroy the database, while they where simply following one of several interpretations of the rules. How you can expect a French user profiling a French release of a French DVD to interpret "standard capitalization rules" as anything but the standard French rules is beyond me.
I have said it before and I will say it again: The rules are per definition ambigious if a noticable number of people interpret them differently. It is as such completely irrelevant if the writer and/or Invelos consider them ambigious or not, the actions and arguments of users show they are, hence the obvious thing to do is clarify the rules. Ken has done this today, not before. Gerri attempted to clarify them a few days (weeks?) ago, but we all (including you) misunderstood it (not surprisingly, unlike what you claim, it really isn't that simple).

Quote:

You wanted to interpret it YOUR way

I did point out how it is possible (and still is possible) to read the rules as if accents can be added. Yes, I prefer keeping the accents because I know it makes the database more valuable to a number of users (not really including me), but it is not a strong opinion and certainly not something I can be bothered fighting over. I can not accept wrong accusation of other people not following the rules as long as the rules are ambigious.

Quote:

, despite my explanations.

You are forgetting it again: You are just a user. We fully understood your explanations, we did not recognize you have any other authority than everyone else, and you didn't really appear like you understood the arguments made from people trying to explain to you the rules where not clear.

Quote:

Well, now it is ove, there are NO cultural issues any longer,

Correct, but the rules should be updated so we can't expect people to read through all forum posts to find the information. It is a bit complex that we should use one language rules to determine what characters to convert, and then English to convert it - but someone with better tech-writer skills than me can probably explain it without too many problems.

Quote:

you do it as I always tried to explain,

I do as Ken explains. Yes it happens to be the same as you did, but you are just a user.

Quote:


and the CA is for Most Commonly Credited, cultural issues belong exactly where I always believed they should have been LOCAL. Its over and finished now drop it.

Yes, if you read what I wrote, I already accept we should use English rules to convert the characters (and people without the necessary knowledge on the subject might indeed refer to these as "neutral" rules - no big deal, I just point out it isn't exectly accurate - call it an old occupational habit).

Quote:

I am really sorry that I ever tried to craft a compromise to try and keep you and some others happy, you caused a bunch of grief fro me.

All you needed to do was listen to people telling you the rules are ambigious. That would have saved you a lot of effort.

Quote:

And you are still whining...please my old friend leave it alone now.

Skip

I am:
1) Trying to make sure I understood the rules correctly.
2) Highlighting the contribution rules are still ambigious and should be updated.
3) Arguing AGAINST the exception for allowing SS to be converted to ß.

You want to consider this whining - fine. I do not really think you have the knowledge required to fully understand what I have been saying, so I can only apolygise for my failure to explain it clearly enough - though I think it would help if you started reading emails assuming people actually do not want to destroy the database.

Quoting Daddy DVD:

Quote:
After ten times the use of the word "ambigious" it appears that spelling can be ambiguous too.  

Good, it means I am consistent which makes it easier to train away. But yes, spelling have never been my strong point in any language.