Quoting VirusPil:

Quote:
This is the ruling so that's how it should be made.

Could you take just a minute to read carefully this post. In fact rule speaks of capitalisation rules, not spelling, and the transformation from upper case to lower case can take several forms:

"LA MACHINE A DECOUDRE"

correct transformation for normal language inside a sentence (just spelling)
"la machine à découdre"

correct transformation for a title (movie, or novel), with French capitalisation rules
"La Machine à découdre"

Invelos rules say that we must use French capitalisation rules in this case, but says nothing about spelling. We saw, in the past, a user arguing that Ken's clarification about names apply also on titles and roles.
That is why hal9g proposed a new ruling in the committee forum to solve the problem, but Ken said nothing. So, with the interpretation using Ken's clarification, the title could be per Invelos rules:
"La Machine a decoudre"

Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:

Ken's clarification was for names, not titles.

I totally agree with that. But there are other users that have a different interpretation (see the link in my previous post).

Quoting Ace_of_Sevens:

Quote:
The difference is that titles only affect one profile and names affect the whole DB.

I agree. One error on a title is not so important and easy to solve. One wrong spelling on one name can break linking for hundreds of profiles. This is why I find it so important to solve this issue on names.

Quoting surfeur51:

Quote:
One wrong spelling on one name can break linking for hundreds of profiles.

No, one different spelling can do that.  If 100 are "incorrect" (in a consistent way) and you "correct" one of them then you've broken linking for that one.  If you correct fifty of them then the database is a mess.

If you always follow the rules then eventually a "common" name should emerge that will make linking work.  (Though all the ping-ponging back and forth until then is quite burdensome.)

---------------

I just think it is unfortunate that Ken chooses to continue to ignore this problem.  He professes this in his description of the product on the website: "With an enormous community of dedicated users worldwide, DVD Profiler has become the most compelling source of DVD information anywhere."

And yet, he continues to propagate the input of incorrect data to the on-line database by refusing to allow people to enter the correct spelling of words in Overviews and the correct spelling of names in the cast and crew areas.

Color me confused! 

P.S. - The "Common Name" system is a joke!

Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
I just think it is unfortunate that Ken chooses to continue to ignore this problem.  He professes this in his description of the product on the website: "With an enormous community of dedicated users worldwide, DVD Profiler has become the most compelling source of DVD information anywhere."

And yet, he continues to propagate the input of incorrect data to the on-line database by refusing to allow people to enter the correct spelling of words in Overviews and the correct spelling of names in the cast and crew areas.

Color me confused! 

It is only confusing, at least to me, if you read 'Movie information' instead of 'DVD information'.  If the word is misspelled in the overview, then that is what should be entered because that is the information provided on the DVD.  I'm not asking you to agree, but that is how I see it.

Quoting Ace_of_Sevens:

Quote:
You're fortunate then. If collection contained any works by peopel with the same name an birthyear, thsi wouldn't be the case.

It's not so much a case of being fortunate - it's just that I've put in the work and followed the rules since day one, that's all. There are, of course, many problems like two people with the same name and the same birth year (or both without a known birth year), but nothing that I can't fix locally. I've got, for instance, about 150 fake birth years in my local database to keep people like that separated. It's unfortunate that we all have to do that kind of separation work by ourselves, but still, locally I have no problems making it work. I am thankful that the program - and the rules - let me do that, while still keeping my data virtually fully contributable (fake birth years don't upload as long as we don't check the box for their inclusion).

Quote:
This is in additional to all the unecessary work caused to keep common names correct.

True - a few posts up I already agreed with scotthm saying the same thing. Having said that, I find that I rarely have to propagate common name shifts, since I usually get the common name right the first time around - I never take the CLT numbers as face value, but instead I always check what the actual common name is. To a trained eye, it doesn't take more than 60 seconds to figure that out in most cases. I've been doing that for many years now, and as we've seen more and more common name-finding threads, I've turned out to be right pretty much every time. As such, I rarely need to go back and change someone's common name in a bunch of my profiles.

I understand that it helps that I've been doing this since day one, and that I'm willing to do the work to end up with data that actually works, but I have, and I am, and I as I said, it works: 100% "as credited" data, AND 100% flawless linking. That's not to say that there's no room for improvement - there is, obviously - but I just don't buy that it can't work. It can: I've got the proof right here. It just takes some work; it's not going to happen automatically. But be warned: I think that's true for every scenario - even if we were going to get some kind of change in this department. As I just outlined, I believe our best bet is to lower the number of profiles that need to be "fixed". Now it's more than half a million, which isn't going to happen anytime soon, but if we were to store only one set of cast and crew per movie, rather than per profile, then that number would lower dramatically, and "fixing" that data would suddenly become a much more realistic and achievable goal.

Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
I just think it is unfortunate that Ken chooses to continue to ignore this problem.  He professes this in his description of the product on the website: "With an enormous community of dedicated users worldwide, DVD Profiler has become the most compelling source of DVD information anywhere."

And yet, he continues to propagate the input of incorrect data to the on-line database by refusing to allow people to enter the correct spelling of words in Overviews and the correct spelling of names in the cast and crew areas.

Color me confused! 

It is only confusing, at least to me, if you read 'Movie information' instead of 'DVD information'.  If the word is misspelled in the overview, then that is what should be entered because that is the information provided on the DVD.  I'm not asking you to agree, but that is how I see it.

I think you misunderstood me.  I am not talking about actual mis-pellings in the Overview on the DVD.  I am talking about the introduction of mis-spellings when we convert all caps or all lower case Overviews to mixed case because the Rules dictate that 'TRES BIEN' (in an Overview) be spelled 'tres bien' instead of 'très bien'.