- From: Mark Davis <mark.davis@icu-project.org>
- Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 18:49:04 -0800
- To: Debbie Garside <debbie@ictmarketing.co.uk>
- CC: 'Martin Duerst' <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, 'Misha Wolf' <Misha.Wolf@reuters.com>, newsml-2@yahoogroups.com, www-international@w3.org
In my experience, precisely the reverse is true. Ask for the whole name, as the user wants, unless you really, really want components. Mark Debbie Garside wrote: > Martin Wrote: > > >> Also, even for some very simple cases, I often wish applications >> would allow two or more name forms. The simplest example is conferences: >> Provide a field for the name as you want it on letters, invoices, and >> so on, and another field for the name as you want it on your nametag. >> > > Surely everyone knows that in designing this type of DB you break it down to > the smallest components and that way you can "stitch" it together anyway you > want... > > Always include (at least): > > [Title] > [Initial] > [Name] > [Surname] > > Making sure that you allow for all eventualities (in field length) in the > Title field (this is where most people go wrong in db design) > > The main problem people have in designing databases is that they do not look > to the "end product" first. > > Regards > > Debbie > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: www-international-request@w3.org [mailto:www-international- >> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Martin Duerst >> Sent: 25 February 2006 13:46 >> To: Mark Davis; Misha Wolf >> Cc: newsml-2@yahoogroups.com; www-international@w3.org >> Subject: Re: People's names >> >> >> At 01:47 06/02/25, Mark Davis wrote: >> > >> >I don't know what the scope of the source document is, but this seems >> like a case of over-engineering, unless they are simply meant as "possible >> examples". Most of these items would be useful only in extremely >> specialized applications. For the vast majority of applications, a simple >> <name>Dr. Jonas T. Sulk III</name>field suffices, without trying to break >> it up into pieces. Delving into surname, baptismal names, Mob nicknames >> (Misha "Lefty" Wolf), Satanic-ritual aliases, and the like become hugely >> complicated and difficult to manage. Beyond the simple name, the other >> most >> useful one we've found is the <sortby>Sulk, Jonas T.</sortby>. >> >> Well, yes, but one thing is that Misha is working on news, where people's >> names turn up in all forms and shapes. This is different from a simple >> database. >> >> Also, even for some very simple cases, I often wish applications >> would allow two or more name forms. The simplest example is conferences: >> Provide a field for the name as you want it on letters, invoices, and >> so on, and another field for the name as you want it on your nametag. >> >> >The discussion of pronunciation seems somewhat muddled by not >> recognizing >> that there are at least a couple of different goals. For most commercial >> uses, a more typical, and more useful, expression would be what people >> actually say their name sounds like. What people usually use in practice >> depends on their source language; a very large number of people are >> unfamiliar with IPA. For example, my wife's name is "Gundelfinger"; she is >> very used to writing "sounds like gun-Dell-finger". For a text-to-speech >> application, on the other hand, IPA would be clearly more suitable. >> >> And then there are people who prefer their name to be pronounced >> 'natively'. Having "Martin" pronounced in an English or German >> way in the middle of a French sentence just doesn't work because >> it sounds like the French female form of that name (Martine). >> >> >> Regards, Martin. >> > > > > >
Received on Monday, 27 February 2006 02:49:13 UTC