 |
|
|
|
Welcome to the Invelos forums. Please read the forum
rules before posting.
Read access to our public forums is open to everyone. To post messages, a free
registration is required.
If you have an Invelos account, sign in to post.
|
|
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1 2 3 4  Previous Next
|
|
Standardizing Names Without Variants |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 17,316 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting hal9g: Quote:
Quoting RHo:
Quote:
This leaves a lot of room for interpretation including the possibility of standardisation. And then the rules try to clear this up with:
Quote:
To determine whether to enter the name directly as credited, or to use the "Credited As" field, use the Credit Lookup tool.
This is a very interesting observation.
If I were to use the parsing powers of my friend Unicus (and I have nowhere near his level of skill at this), it would be very easy to draw the conclusion from this section that we are to use the "Lookup Tool" ONLY to determine if the "Credited As" field should be employed for the credit in question.
Nowhere in those Rules does it say to actually use the name that you find in the Lookup Tool as the "Actor Name" (otherwise known as the "common name").
I think we all know what the "intent" was, but if we are not supposed to decipher "intent" then we have no directive in the Rules as to what to use as the 'Actor Name' (common name). The fact that we are directed to drop affiliations, implies that some standardization is acceptable. But how much? How much? I would say only the amount that the rules tells us to... no more... no less. | | | | Pete |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 6,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Addicted2DVD: Quote:
How much? I would say only the amount that the rules tells us to... no more... no less. Well, as I said, the Rules don't actually tell us where to get or how to form the "Actor Name" (common name) when it is different than the "Credited As" name! | | | | Hal |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Addicted2DVD: Quote:
Which I still feel that in general this thread/poll is only looking for a way to get support for breaking that said rule... because I am sure you know as well as I do that if the poll results came in favor of standardizing that some people on this forum would use this poll for a reason to do so in their contributions. Yes, you are absolutely correct...some will. | | | | Hal |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,480 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Addicted2DVD: Quote:
Which I still feel that in general this thread/poll is only looking for a way to get support for breaking that said rule... because I am sure you know as well as I do that if the poll results came in favor of standardizing that some people on this forum would use this poll for a reason to do so in their contributions. I created the poll and I can assure that I didn't do it from a desire to break any rules. Surely we must be allowed to discuss something that not everyone agrees on without calling it a rule-breaking discussion? The topic of this poll came up, as referenced in the first post, during the discussion of parsing Native American names. In the course of the discussion, it became apparent that we needed to define that we should not use any form of standardization on names that had no variants. Rather than unilaterally inserting that clause into the guidelines we're using for the 'Credited As' database, I thought it would be good to start a poll so that this clarification would have the support of the forum. As the poll results show, it does have the support of the forum. And by support of the forum, what I'm referring to is that most people in the forum interpret the rules as you do. Some don't, but I would hardly call them rule breakers. There are differences of opinion on how to read the rules. But most people interpret them in the same way you do, and I knew that they would when I created the poll. So now when we amend our working guidelines, we can do so knowing that most people here support the clause that we'll use and the thread will reference this poll as it has done for the other guidelines that are in use for the 'Credited As' database. | | | ...James
"People fake a lot of human interactions, but I feel like I fake them all, and I fake them very well. That’s my burden, I guess." ~ Dexter Morgan |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,316 |
| | Posted: | | | | I see what you are saying James... I took it the opposite way then what you meant it... I apologize for that. | | | | Pete |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,199 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting m.cellophane: Quote:
Quoting Unicus69:
Quote:
Wow, the first accusation of spinning and fish mongering I have ever gotten from James. This certainly is a day to remember. 
I'm sorry. Truly. I think I'm frustrated with the method of discussion here. And in my frustration, I'm contributing to that which I don't like.  *snipped for space*No worries mate. It just caught me by surprise is all. I understand your frustration and I can understand that, on occasion, there might be some unintended collateral damage. I hold no hard feelings.  | | | 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: 13,199 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting hal9g: Quote:
This is a very interesting observation.
If I were to use the parsing powers of my friend Unicus (and I have nowhere near his level of skill at this), it would be very easy to draw the conclusion from this section that we are to use the "Lookup Tool" ONLY to determine if the "Credited As" field should be employed for the credit in question.
Nowhere in those Rules does it say to actually use the name that you find in the Lookup Tool as the "Actor Name" (otherwise known as the "common name"). Your parsing powers are actually pretty good as I read it the same way. Quote:
I think we all know what the "intent" was, but if we are not supposed to decipher "intent" then we have no directive in the Rules as to what to use as the 'Actor Name' (common name). The fact that we are directed to drop affiliations, implies that some standardization is acceptable. But how much? Again, I read it the same way you do. The intent, however, has come from discussions with Ken. When the field was first introduced, we asked him for a tool to allow us to find the most commonly credited name in the Invelos db. While it took more time than we would have liked, he did give us the 'Credit Lookup' and told us to use it. All of that combined tells me we are supposed to get the name from the lookup tool. Absent that knowledge, which would apply to most users, it is quite unclear. I guess we need to figure out how to clear up this mess. | | | 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 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Unicus:
Have you not learned anything yet. You can take ANY Rule or LAW and parse it to the point of total ambiguity, thereby negating its value completely. I don't care how carefully crafted the Rule or Law is it can always be parsed to non-existence. Which happens to be something that you excel in, that is neither intended to be an insult nor a compliment it is an observation. I see this kind of stuff happen all day, every day in our nation's courts and Capitol building.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,199 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
Unicus:
Have you not learned anything yet. You can take ANY Rule or LAW and parse it to the point of total ambiguity, thereby negating its value completely. I don't care how carefully crafted the Rule or Law is it can always be parsed to non-existence. Which happens to be something that you excel in, that is neither intended to be an insult nor a compliment it is an observation. I see this kind of stuff happen all day, every day in our nation's courts and Capitol building.
Skip If that is what you think, then you have no idea what the word 'parse' means. You can not parse a rule or law to the point of ambiguity. From M-W.com: parse 1 a: to resolve (as a sentence) into component parts of speech and describe them grammatically b: to describe grammatically by stating the part of speech and explaining the inflection and syntactical relationships Once a sentence has been properly parsed, you have the base meaning without intent and interpretation. Of course, if the rule was ambiguous to begin with, parsing it will not make it any clearer. What you see, "every day in our nation's courts and Capitol building," though I doubt very seriously that you see it every day, is manipulation. Just as an aside, when I parse a rule, I do it without an agenda. Because words have meaning and sentences have structure, sometimes I am happy and sometimes I am not. This paricular rule is a case where I am not. | | | 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 |
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1 2 3 4 Previous Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |