| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 3,436 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting the Rules: Quote:
Studios occasionally re-release titles with the same UPC, but with changed content – for example Cover Images, Case Type and Overview. All information in the main DVD Profiler database is to be for the Original Release version of the disc; do not contribute any information that is specific to a re-release. You can of course keep this re-release information in your local database profile, but do not contribute it to the main database. Bold by me.Ken mentioned this Quoting Ken Cole: Quote:
All Disc ID information is captured, but not stored in the profile. It is stored in the master list to support adding by Disc ID for variations other than the accepted version. in the Rules for Lock List? thread. So, I guess the question is, does the Disc-ID fall under the "All information ... is to be for the Original Release version of the disc" clause and if yes, how can Disc-ID variation be handled? | | | Achim [諾亞信； Ya-Shin//Nuo], a German in Taiwan.
Registered: May 29, 2000 (at InterVocative) |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 1,911 |
| | Posted: | | | | That would be hard to make a rule on, since the same release can have as many as 3 different disc id's. | | | | Signature banned: Reason out of date... |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 |  Posts: 2,366 |
| | Posted: | | | | I would say that a user needs to show the creation date of the disc in the contribution notes for the voters to decide if it's the first release. | | | Martin Zuidervliet
DVD Profiler Nederlands |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 2,759 |
| | Posted: | | | | If I do understand the online database correctly, then more than one disc id is collected online, while only the last one, which has been added, is displayed. Those disc ids are needed by the online database to properly support the add by disc id function. Therefore also the disc ids of re-releases (with the same UPC) should be collected to the same profile. |
|