| Author |
Message |
| Registered: August 4, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 2,441 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Addicted2DVD: Quote:
Simple answer to that... if it is a contribution that only adds an alternate disc ID... feel free to click the neutral button. And this is what I ever do. Quote:
as for how to vote on the one you showed... really not sure what it is I am looking at. I am guessing (based on what this thread is about) someone is adding an alternate disc id as an additional disc? If that is what I am seeing I would vote no. That is not how it has ever been done... it gives the appearance that there is a 2 disc set... field is even labeled disc 1... disc 2... etc. So I would vote no to such a thing. If that is what I am looking at that is. Yes the contribution is for a children profile of a box set, and I voted NO. But the rule as it is now can be misinterpreted. | | | | Updated List of Accepted Birth Years |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 4,685 |
| | Posted: | | | | Here's the way I see things:
A box set parent has a UPC (or EAN).
If there are box set children for the same parent UPC, but with different disc id's, then it has to be assumed that these children have the same content, and therefore it would be OK to submit alternate disc id's.
It's the same thing as submitting alternate disc id's for a normal UPC based profile. If it's the same UPC, you have to assume it's the same content.
Since Ken has said - or at least inferred - that it doesn't interfer with proper linking of box set children, I see no problem in submitting alternate id's. | | | My freeware tools for DVD Profiler users.
Gunnar |
|
| Registered: August 4, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,441 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting GSyren: Quote:
Here's the way I see things:
A box set parent has a UPC (or EAN).
If there are box set children for the same parent UPC, but with different disc id's, then it has to be assumed that these children have the same content, and therefore it would be OK to submit alternate disc id's.
It's the same thing as submitting alternate disc id's for a normal UPC based profile. If it's the same UPC, you have to assume it's the same content.
Since Ken has said - or at least inferred - that it doesn't interfer with proper linking of box set children, I see no problem in submitting alternate id's. Yes, but not two different disc id on the same contribution for one disc. | | | | Updated List of Accepted Birth Years |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,685 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Kluge: Quote:
Yes, but not two different disc id on the same contribution for one disc. No, I was referring to the original question. My point was that you do have a UPC - for the parent. I totally agree that you cannot contribute two different id's in the same contribution. | | | My freeware tools for DVD Profiler users.
Gunnar | | | | Last edited: by GSyren |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 1,819 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Addicted2DVD: Quote:
So if I understand correctly... if the content is the same then adding the alternate disc ID is correct. But if the content is different (different aspect ratio, different extras or what have you) then make a new profile for the disc.  That's not how I read Ken's statement at all. I think he's saying that if the Disc ID is different for Disc ID Created Profiles then the content probably is too. Therefore, create a new profile. Personally (I haven't read this entire thread) but it's common sense to create a new profile. After all, to locate the profile you use the Disc ID (unless you're lazy and go by the boxset contents) by inserting your disc. This ensures you have located the correct profile. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | I completely disagree... or he would have had no reason to say any of what I put in bold below.... Quoting Ken Cole: Quote:
We allow submission of alternate IDs in the Disc ID section for UPC-based profiles, so I don't see a good reason to disallow this for Disc-ID based profiles.
One note: If the Disc ID is different. then the disc is definitely not an identical match. There's some difference, be it in content or creation date. If that difference manifests in a way that's tracked in DVD Profiler, it should be entered as an independent profile under the new Disc ID. So with him saying that we must see if there is an actual difference in the content of the disc (on items we actually track) to determine if we add the alternate disc id or make a new profile. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Pantheon: Quote:
(I haven't read this entire thread) but it's common sense to create a new profile. After all, to locate the profile you use the Disc ID (unless you're lazy and go by the boxset contents) by inserting your disc. This ensures you have located the correct profile. right... and with both disc ids attached to the one profile you do indeed get the correct profile... without having to have 2 (or more) identical profiles in the database. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: December 22, 2008 |  Posts: 87 |
| | Posted: | | | | Just to be sure (I'm currently dealing with such a case): does this also apply to releases that re-use some old EAN/UPC (short GTIN for both systems), but have completely re-done disc content (meaning different audio/video specs & features, not only changed covers and overviews)? To make it even more clear: when a GTIN is re-used, but the film/"main content" changed, it's pretty clear – the only way to track the new release is to go by Disc ID. We're clearly not allowed to change the GTIN-profile to reflect the content of release with re-used GTIN. Now the more specific question, I'd like an answer for: the film stays the same, but the distributor drops the vanilla disc with six language tracks. The distributor re-uses the GTIN but now packs the film on a disc, that has only three language tracks, but a lot of new bonus material we are technically able to track – Audio Commentaries, Isolated Score, Music Video and Documentaries – and that wasn't present on the initial release. Are we allowed to track such a new "Special Edition" of the same movie as Disc-ID-profile (because we can't change the GTIN-profile to reflect the complete re-authoring of the disc)? Please discuss and explain if I'm completely wrong about that one. Ken, any helpful advice?  |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting M_E: Quote:
Are we allowed to track such a new "Special Edition" of the same movie as Disc-ID-profile (because we can't change the GTIN-profile to reflect the complete re-authoring of the disc)? Not only are we allowed, but I believe we are required to do so. | | | 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: 3,197 |
| | Posted: | | | | SInce the disc ID is just about the only unique and unquestionable evidence we have of a difference (be it minor or major) it's very unfortunate if they are allowed to be mixed up in the same profiles. It's okay for UPC profiles because they are of course tracking the original UPC release first and foremost but still allow for re-releeases to be tracked in the disc ID field, but when using the disc ID as the sole identifier there should never be any doubt about which disc we are actually trying to capture. If I download a profile with one disc ID as the identifier and another in the disc ID field, I can't be sure of what I'm looking at. So in my opinion it's always better to create a new profile. | | | | First registered: February 15, 2002 |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | I have to say that I agree with KinoNiki on this. | | | 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 14, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,819 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting KinoNiki: Quote:
SInce the disc ID is just about the only unique and unquestionable evidence we have of a difference (be it minor or major) it's very unfortunate if they are allowed to be mixed up in the same profiles. It's okay for UPC profiles because they are of course tracking the original UPC release first and foremost but still allow for re-releeases to be tracked in the disc ID field, but when using the disc ID as the sole identifier there should never be any doubt about which disc we are actually trying to capture. If I download a profile with one disc ID as the identifier and another in the disc ID field, I can't be sure of what I'm looking at. So in my opinion it's always better to create a new profile. What he said! |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 20,111 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting KinoNiki: Quote:
SInce the disc ID is just about the only unique and unquestionable evidence we have of a difference (be it minor or major) it's very unfortunate if they are allowed to be mixed up in the same profiles. It's okay for UPC profiles because they are of course tracking the original UPC release first and foremost but still allow for re-releeases to be tracked in the disc ID field, but when using the disc ID as the sole identifier there should never be any doubt about which disc we are actually trying to capture. If I download a profile with one disc ID as the identifier and another in the disc ID field, I can't be sure of what I'm looking at. So in my opinion it's always better to create a new profile. Totally agree. That's exactly how I am viewing this situation. | | | | Corey |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | What can I tell you... Ken was aware of this subject since I first brought it up just over 5 months ago (I had opened a support ticket the same time I opened this thread and got the answer they they would let me know)... and finally made his decision on the subject.
personally I think he made the correct decision. I see no logical reason to have identical profiles in the database just because of a different disc id. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,685 |
| |
| Registered: October 30, 2011 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 1,870 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Addicted2DVD: Quote:
I completely disagree... or he would have had no reason to say any of what I put in bold below....
Quoting Ken Cole:
Quote:
We allow submission of alternate IDs in the Disc ID section for UPC-based profiles, so I don't see a good reason to disallow this for Disc-ID based profiles.
One note: If the Disc ID is different. then the disc is definitely not an identical match. There's some difference, be it in content or creation date. If that difference manifests in a way that's tracked in DVD Profiler, it should be entered as an independent profile under the new Disc ID.
So with him saying that we must see if there is an actual difference in the content of the disc (on items we actually track) to determine if we add the alternate disc id or make a new profile. However if I have Disc ID X and what is profiled is Disc ID Y...And I find a difference I would then create a new Disc ID...but what if the difference was dur to the fact Disc ID Y was not profiled correctly. I wouldn't be able to tell that since I have the different disc DI ...it would seem that we would have more consistancy to just always create a new profile. That way we always know the action taken |
|