Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
But it is still based omn language and NOT data, Martian. And like I said the Rules do not support nor do they imply acceptance of your opinion. Even though i might personally be able to agree with you, the data does not comform to subdividers on their own. Both dividers are handled by the filmmakers in identical ways.

Unfortunately, or fortunately depending on which side of the fence you are on, the rules do not support your position.  The rules simply state, "Use Group dividers to designate cast grouped in the credits such as "Soldiers" or "Additional Cast"."  You will note that there is no mention of format, just that they be grouped in the credits with a header of some kind.

In my opinion, what we have here is a single group of people, members of the 617 squadron.  Within that group is a subset of people, Wing Commander Guy Gibson's crew.  I know this because of the way the header is written.

While I can understand what you are saying, it just seems wrong to me...note I said it seems wrong to ME, not that it was wrong. 

Your method would give us two dividers...

Members of 617 Squadron
Wing Commander Guy Gibson ... Richard Todd

His Crew
Flt/Lt. R. D. Trevor-Roper ... Brewster Mason
Flt/Lt. R.E.G. Hutchison ... Tony Doonan
Flying/Off. F.M. Spafford ... Nigel Stock
Flt/Lt. A.T. Taerum ... Brian Nissen
Flt/Sgt. J. Pulford ... Robert Shaw
Plt/Off. G.A. Deering ... Peter Assinder

...and, for reason already stated in this thread, that just doesn't make any sense to me.  Content gives the dividers context and, in my opinion, should not be ignored.

The first word is the most important and dictates how this should be done: Members (plural NOT singular). One man does not make Members.

North:

Since you are so intelligent, show me in the Rules where it dictates that you can use language and/or qwords to make that determination. you won't because you CAN'T. The Rules make NO such statement. You canniot write tghe rules the way YOU want or wish them to appear.

Same to you kathy, the Rules do not make that provision.

Quoting CharlieM:

Quote:
Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
Quoting Mole:

Quote:
I believe that the regular crew of a Lancaster bomber was 7, which would account for the six following Gibson. They probably merit a group divider. The rest can then follow as ordinary cast

They should all be under the 'Members of 617 Squadron' divider as they are all members of the squadron.  The 6 under 'His Crew' were the ones on his plane.  Unfortunately, because we don't have nested dividers, we will end up with three of them...

Members of 617 Squadron
Wing Commander Guy Gibson ... Richard Todd

Members of 617 Squadron - His Crew
FLT/LT  R. D. Trevor-Roper... Brewster Mason
Etc.

Members of 617 Squadron
The rest of the squadron

This is the way I would do it.  It should be nesting, but since that is not available, We use what ken suggested during a previous discussion.

Charlie

The only other thing I will add is that I hope Ken didn't intend this as a permanent solution.

Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
North:

Since you are so intelligent, show me in the Rules where it dictates that you can use language and/or qwords to make that determination. you won't because you CAN'T. The Rules make NO such statement. You canniot write tghe rules the way YOU want or wish them to appear.

Same to you kathy, the Rules do not make that provision.

There have been numerous exceptions to the rules and this might also qualify. Until the nesting situation is resolved, hopefully Ken will weigh in and settle this.

Quoting bigdaddyhorse:

Quote:
It's even more of an issue with crew, for anthology films where some crew is segment spec. and others are credited for the whole film.

I found the group dividers seperate the directors only, everyone else gets lumped together. Episode dividers work properly but the rules say no to them. Needs a working middle ground or lots of local locks.

I suppose it all depends on how the crew are formatted but wouldn't an anthology film fit under the "or other logical episodic distinction" definition?

Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
North:

Since you are so intelligent, show me in the Rules where it dictates that you can use language and/or qwords to make that determination. you won't because you CAN'T. The Rules make NO such statement. You canniot write tghe rules the way YOU want or wish them to appear.

Same to you kathy, the Rules do not make that provision.

Since you are so intelligent, show me, in the rules, where it dictates that you can't use language and/or words to make that determination.  You won't, because you can't.  The rules make no such statement.  You cannot write the rules the way you want or wish them to appear.

See how that statement works both ways?

Quoting Kathy:

Quote:
There have been numerous exceptions to the rules and this might also qualify. Until the nesting situation is resolved, hopefully Ken will weigh in and settle this.

Don't get sucked in.  No exception is needed as the rules do not require cast headers to be formatted in any specific manner.  You first post on this issue was, in my opinion, spot on.  It would, however, be nice if Ken weighed in...if for no other reason that to prevent this from spinning out of control.