 |
|
|
|
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 5 6 ...12  Previous Next
|
|
"Widescreen" not on the cover |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 1,911 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting hal9g: Quote:
So the consensus is that if it says Widescreen (or Fullscreen) anywhere on the DVD box then it should be put in the "Edition" field even if there is no current release in a different version, but because there might be one in the future and it will help distinguish them when and if the other ever gets released! I would not go that far. I would only use widescreen if and only if there was currently a fullscreen or pan and scan version avaialble. If a second version does not exist using Widescreen, in my opinion, would violate the rules. | | | | Signature banned: Reason out of date... | | | | Last edited: by NewEnglander |
| | Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 1,777 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting hal9g: Quote:
So the consensus is that if it says Widescreen (or Fullscreen) anywhere on the DVD box then it should be put in the "Edition" field even if there is no current release in a different version, but because there might be one in the future and it will help distinguish them when and if the other ever gets released!
We've got a ton of work to do to get all those widescreen DVDs updated to reflect "Widescreen" in the Edition field if that's what the Rules say.
I believe that we also need to add "Dual Layered" to the Edition field as well if it appears on the back of the DVD, especially if there is a a single layered DVD already out there and even if there isn't one, just in case one is released in the future.
And how about "Anamorphic", "Captioned", "Color", "Double-Disc Set", etc. These are all potentially editions that would help distinguish between different versions of the same DVD.
In fact "DVD", "Blu ray" and "HD-DVD" also belong in the Edition field using the strictest interpretation of the Rule.
Man, have we got a lot of work to do!  Thank you for so clearly expressing my irritation with how this once useful field had been turned into utter crap.  |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
Enry:
Perhaps i have spent too many years in the poltical world of Washington DC, but to me intent is every bit as important as the letter of the law. What was the designer(s) of the law trying to achieve.
Skip While I believe your objection deserves thoughtful consideration, I find that the DVD Profiler submission rules have no records to reveal any debate (during development) to give meaningful insight into the rule writers' intentions. There is nowhere to find the intent behind the rules. We must take the rules as they are written. If there are loopholes, either they are meant to be there, or they just haven't provoked enough problems to require tightening them up. I believe the rules, as written, allow "edition"s to come from the box, not just the front cover. But, on the other hand (and I see no one discussing this yet), a simple listing of widescreen in the specifications, to me, do not an edition make. I think, even if we take the edition from the back cover, the spine, or even the front cover, it should seem obvious to any observer that this describes an edition, not just a feature. | | | If it wasn't for bad taste, I wouldn't have no taste at all.
Cliff |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting pplchamp: Quote:
Quoting hal9g:
Quote:
So the consensus is that if it says Widescreen (or Fullscreen) anywhere on the DVD box then it should be put in the "Edition" field even if there is no current release in a different version, but because there might be one in the future and it will help distinguish them when and if the other ever gets released!
I would not go that far. I would only use widescreen if and only if there was currently a fullscreen or pan and scan version avaialble. If a second version does not exist using Widescreen, in my opinion, would violate the rules. I was simply referring to this post: Quoting Addicted2DVD: Quote:
that one seems pretty simple to me... as I was told... it says "and ensure it will help between different releases of the same title." but as I was told... and is literally true... it does not say it has to be current releases... just that it will help. | | | | Hal |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 5,493 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting hal9g: Quote:
I believe that we also need to add "Dual Layered" to the Edition field as well if it appears on the back of the DVD, especially if there is a a single layered DVD already out there and even if there isn't one, just in case one is released in the future.
And how about "Anamorphic", "Captioned", "Color", "Double-Disc Set", etc. These are all potentially editions that would help distinguish between different versions of the same DVD.
You forgot Black and White and any colorized fields too.. ... But there is an area all ready within video format for anamorphic and disc information for dual layer.  | | | In the 60's, People took Acid to make the world Weird. Now the World is weird and People take Prozac to make it Normal.
Terry |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
Sorry, Unicus. I simply don't see it your way. And I don't understand how you can't. Your way adds a phrase to the rules that does not exist. My way follows the letter of the rule.  Quote:
And i see most your comments relative to the are designed to allow and even widen loopholes, see your numerous coments regarding intent. For some reason you want the Rules toi be just as loose as you can make them and allow for nearly every imaginable loophole...which to me is as bad as no rules at all. I have no idea what you are on about. All my comments regarding intent have been, we should ignore it and do exactly what the rules say we are to do. Intent opens loopholes. Letter of the rule does not, and I am all for letter of the rule. If I wasn't, you would not have been able to acuse me of being a parser...which you have done on more than one occasion. A parser, which I fully own up to, does not look at intent. A parser looks only at the meaning of the words and the way the are put together. You must have me confused with somebody else. | | | 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: 5,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | Are we all missing what's really important? The only things needed in the edition field are Anamorphic Widescreen or not, and Direct to DVD or not. | | | If it wasn't for bad taste, I wouldn't have no taste at all.
Cliff |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | Oh, and maybe Director's Unrated Version or not. | | | If it wasn't for bad taste, I wouldn't have no taste at all.
Cliff |
| | Registered: March 21, 2007 | | Posts: 171 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
Enry:
Perhaps i have spent too many years in the poltical world of Washington DC, but to me intent is every bit as important as the letter of the law. What was the designer(s) of the law trying to achieve.
Skip Where does it say anywhere to take the information from the front cover? Surely if the intent was to take the information from the front cover, then the rules would simply say: take it from the front cover. Where do you get off suggesting that Unicus is bending the rules? Anyone suggesting that it can only come from the front cover is bending the rules to what they would like the rules to be. Unfortunately the front cover isn't mentioned in this regard at all. Period. | | | | Graham |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 3,321 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting pplchamp: Quote:
Quoting hal9g:
Quote:
So the consensus is that if it says Widescreen (or Fullscreen) anywhere on the DVD box then it should be put in the "Edition" field even if there is no current release in a different version, but because there might be one in the future and it will help distinguish them when and if the other ever gets released!
I would not go that far. I would only use widescreen if and only if there was currently a fullscreen or pan and scan version avaialble. If a second version does not exist using Widescreen, in my opinion, would violate the rules. That's what I would do as well. I would say adding widescreen in this case is allowed by the rules (as I interpret them of course). But that doesn't mean I agree with it or would have done it myself. In fact I'm all for forbidding adding this type of data in a future revision. As mentioned before, that data is already captured and one of the rules of having a good database is not entering the same data two or more times which is exactly what is happening here. | | | Get the CSVExport and Database Query plug-ins here.
Create fake parent profiles to organize your collection. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting hal9g: Quote:
So the consensus is that if it says Widescreen (or Fullscreen) anywhere on the DVD box then it should be put in the "Edition" field even if there is no current release in a different version, but because there might be one in the future and it will help distinguish them when and if the other ever gets released! Don't get me wrong. I never said should. All I said was it is allowed by the rules. I don't do it myself, but I will not vote 'no' if somebody else decides to do it. | | | 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: | | | | Quoting FUBAR: Quote:
Quoting skipnet50:
Quote:
Enry:
Perhaps i have spent too many years in the poltical world of Washington DC, but to me intent is every bit as important as the letter of the law. What was the designer(s) of the law trying to achieve.
Skip
Where does it say anywhere to take the information from the front cover? Surely if the intent was to take the information from the front cover, then the rules would simply say: take it from the front cover.
Where do you get off suggesting that Unicus is bending the rules? Anyone suggesting that it can only come from the front cover is bending the rules to what they would like the rules to be. Unfortunately the front cover isn't mentioned in this regard at all. Period. Well speaking for the person who conceivced the concept to begin with. little was it imagined that users would play the games with the Rules that they have played and continue to play. I can't agree with you, Unicus for reasons which you know too well. Its called intent...and i know the persons who conceived the concept on a very personal basis. Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
...Its called intent...and i know the persons who conceived the concept on a very personal basis.
Skip And how should any other contributor or voter know any of this? There is no written history text for us to ponder. Nothing beyond your say-so as to any intent which is not contained within the rules themselves. If we are believe you (and there no reason why we should not), then obviously the rule itself was written extremely poorly, indicating that the edition can be taken from the box, and not specifying that it must come from the front cover only. If you are correct, then the rule is needlessly vague, and can only lead to trouble. Rewrite! | | | If it wasn't for bad taste, I wouldn't have no taste at all.
Cliff |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Cliff:
In retrospect I agree with you. Like I said we simply did not understand all the gamesmanship which would be applied to the Rules, let alone this particular game which is trying to, in my estimation create something which does not exist out of whole cloth. As I said earlier, I don't like the Widescreen Edition that is sometimes on the back cover but I can at least swallow hard and accept that, while cursing Hollywood again, some more and still. But THIS is creating something out of NOTHING.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
Cliff:
In retrospect I agree with you. Like I said we simply did not understand all the gamesmanship which would be applied to the Rules, let alone this particular game which is trying to, in my estimation create something which does not exist out of whole cloth. As I said earlier, I don't like the Widescreen Edition that is sometimes on the back cover but I can at least swallow hard and accept that, while cursing Hollywood again, some more and still. But THIS is creating something out of NOTHING.
Skip I knew you had it in you! I believe you, that this probably was the intent of the rules writers. But, unfortunately, they did not write the rules to make this intent concrete. And just your writing of it here does not make this vague intent tangible to the vast majority of submitters and voters. So, for the time being, I'd like to return to my idea (again, so far discussed only by me -- if one person can have a discussion if no one responds to it...) that "... a simple listing of widescreen in the specifications, to me, do not an edition make. I think, even if we take the edition from the back cover, the spine, or even the front cover, it should seem obvious to any observer that this describes an edition, not just a feature." | | | If it wasn't for bad taste, I wouldn't have no taste at all.
Cliff |
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1 2 3 4 5 6 ...12 Previous Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |