Quote:
I don't care what we have always done or whether that's even true or not. We have a new field and we should consider its content.

If indeed (as T!M and Unicus69 suggest) we want to capture the distributor in the literal way, then that's fine. If (like, for example, m.cellophane) we would like to capture the DVD producer/label, but feel compelled by the current field name to do something else, then that's an entirely different matter.

We are still in Beta. If necessary, Ken can still change the field name without causing a lot of hassle. I have made my preference clear. You (the general one, not skipnet50) should take a moment to consider what YOUR preference is and not blindly draw conclusions from a field name that may have been chosen without giving it much thought.

That's not to critize Ken, btw. I colloquially refer to companies like Criterion as DVD distributor myself, even if technically they are not.

Quote:
Quoting goodguy:

Quote:
We are still in Beta. If necessary, Ken can still change the field name without causing a lot of hassle. I have made my preference clear. You (the general one, not skipnet50) should take a moment to consider what YOUR preference is and not blindly draw conclusions from a field name that may have been chosen without giving it much thought.

That's not to critize Ken, btw. I colloquially refer to companies like Criterion as DVD distributor myself, even if technically they are not.

I would certainly welcome a change of this field from Media Distributor to Media Label or some other name that would let us track the brand. Criterion is a good example of a line that I believe many would like to track as one group, regardless of who they use as their distributor at any given moment.

Quoting goodguy:

Quote:
Au contraire, Mathias. The matter was given very careful thought.

Again, as Matthias said, this is not to criticize Ken, but you have no way to know what sort of thought went into the creation of this new field. Many in the forum have called for a distributor when in reality they most likely meant label name. He's given us what we asked for in a literal sense, but now that we see some of the pitfalls, it's not too late to refine our request for this data. It really would be a quick fix. We've already seen Ratings Details get a makeover from its original state.

Quote:
(...)
If indeed (as T!M and Unicus69 suggest) we want to capture the distributor in the literal way, then that's fine. If (like, for example, m.cellophane) we would like to capture the DVD producer/label, but feel compelled by the current field name to do something else, then that's an entirely different matter.
(...)

Quote:
I've added a contribution filter to change "20th Century Fox Home Entertainment" to "Twentieth Century Fox Home Entertainment"

Quote:
Quoting goodguy:

Quote:
(...)
If indeed (as T!M and Unicus69 suggest) we want to capture the distributor in the literal way, then that's fine. If (like, for example, m.cellophane) we would like to capture the DVD producer/label, but feel compelled by the current field name to do something else, then that's an entirely different matter.
(...)

Believe me, it isn't what I want to capture either.  It is simply what the rules call for.  My preference would be for a second field to be added so that we could track the DVD Production company as well as the distributor.

Quote:
I've added a contribution filter to change "20th Century Fox Home Entertainment" to "Twentieth Century Fox Home Entertainment"