If that's the big deal, jrroen. I still don't see any cause for confusion or failure in comprehension. These sorts of things cone up now and again, and we recognize that's a problem and deal with it the best we can until ken can. It happens, annoying yes, but cause for a breakdown in comprehension, hardly.

Quoting JeroenX:

Quote:
... But the program forces us to check PAL/NTSC, which doesn't belong to the main media (if Blu-ray).

So we have to contribute data (PAL/NTSC) which, according to the rule, may not be entered.

That's why put forward a change request both on the anamorphic AND the PAL/NTSC issue. For the moment the rule is inconsistent with what is forced by the program. But as written in this thread before: it looks like an oversight. I'm not sure it would warrant 3.8.3 as a single important cause, but that is up to Ken.

Quoting eommen:

Quote:

That said, it is also clear Kathy does have an interpretation issue with the boxset part rule as it is presently written.

The only problem I have is the presumption that this issue is clear - the majority of people do not agree.

Quoting Kathy:

Quote:
I decided to go through this thread and see how clear the issue is:

Tick box?

Yes: 4
No: 5
Other: 4

Quoting Kathy:

Quote:
Quoting eommen:

Quote:

That said, it is also clear Kathy does have an interpretation issue with the boxset part rule as it is presently written.

The only problem I have is the presumption that this issue is clear - the majority of people do not agree.

Quoting Kathy:

Quote:
I decided to go through this thread and see how clear the issue is:

Tick box?



Yes: 4
No: 5
Other: 4

Oh yeah that's a real cleat majority from a real solid statistical sample. Come on. I could put a lot more provocative spin to that.

Oh Kathy, too bad I can't talk to you.

Scooter
The rule needs updating to reflect the possibility of DVD as the primary media, it does exist in that form. Also need to figure out how to deal with a combo that is dual sided but beyond that..I see no need to even modify the program.

Users don't recognize the power that they hsve in bring able to deal with their local data as they wish. Thus those abilities could be important to some. Instead of recognizing the power, and st the same time the need for the online to be homogenous because it would be a nightmare to have every user simply submitting data his way, we've btdt. But some users would prefer to just go on and on, simply because they want ti be allowed to have the online reflect their needs with total disregard how that might negatively impact another user or users.

Quoting Voltaire53:

Quote:
FWIW I am in the 'use it' camp... not just because we are allowed to but because the DVD child profile is supposed to be optional.

Given it is optional it may not be in the database, or may not be downloaded by those who don't use child profiles, so logically I think the Anamorphic box should be ticked in the main (possibly only) profile as it provides data about the DVD.

Since it's obvious that BDs aren't/cannot be Anamorphic there can be no cause for confusion; if it's ticked it must mean it's referring to the DVD, so, to me, there is no downside to ticking it where appropriate for the DVD and there is an upside in that it provides more information.

This is the post that sums up the reasons that highlight the rationale for including such data in the parent profile.

Quoting Kathy:

Quote:
Quoting Voltaire53:

Quote:
FWIW I am in the 'use it' camp... not just because we are allowed to but because the DVD child profile is supposed to be optional.

Given it is optional it may not be in the database, or may not be downloaded by those who don't use child profiles, so logically I think the Anamorphic box should be ticked in the main (possibly only) profile as it provides data about the DVD.

Since it's obvious that BDs aren't/cannot be Anamorphic there can be no cause for confusion; if it's ticked it must mean it's referring to the DVD, so, to me, there is no downside to ticking it where appropriate for the DVD and there is an upside in that it provides more information.

This is the post that sums up the reasons that highlight the rationale for including such data in the parent profile.

However Kathy,

I think we would all agree that the rules are there to ensure consistancy in the online database. 

Currently the rule states:
Sets containing the same film on multiple media types (such as a Blu-ray/DVD combo pack) are to be entered as a normal profile for the main media type (Blu-ray in this example), with all included media types checked. A combo which includes HD media (HD-DVD, Blu-ray) as well as DVD should use the details from the HD media in the main profile. However, you may add an additional profile by Disc ID for the DVD content and add this profile to the Box Set contents for the Blu-ray profile.

That in itself shows that Anamorphic should not be set in the current rules since that is an attribute of the DVD in the BD/DVD combo. 

There are posts here that give different reasons and rationale why it should, which is fine.  But for each and every one of those to be supported the rule needs to be changed.  If you look at the arguments of the people stating that it should be ticked, it is not based on the interpretation of the rules it is because thay think it would be valuable to do it another way and that is not the debate here.

The debate should be solely based on what the rules state.  If there are enough people that believe the rule needs to be adjusted that that should be taken to the rules forum and taked about there.

A combo which includes HD media (HD-DVD, Blu-ray) as well as DVD should use the details from the HD media in the main profile is pretty clear.

So unless Ken make a clarification that video formats do not count in that statement anamorphic should not be checked in a BD/DVD combo.