Quote:
Quoting T!M:

Quote:
Read this... Why most users are choosing "digipak" for Case 2 is because, simply put, that's what it is. Allmost ALL digipaks come in some kind of outer box - with a few exceptions of course. That outer box/sleeve/cover or whatever you want to call it, doesn't turn it into a box set: it's simply part of what a multiple disc "digipak" is. Also: the "slip case" from Case 2 could also contain not a digipak, but a single keepcase with a single movie. It wouldn't be a "box set" then, would it? Once you realize that, it's obvious that you cannot let the outer "slip case" / "slip cover" / whatever decide what to call a "box set" and what not. "Box set" as a case type is only to be used for a kind of box that holds multiple, separately packaged discs, whether they're packaged in keepcases, thinpaks, snappers,...

The thing that most people seem to look at is the disc... "Where is my disc...?" The disc is in a digipak, so that's what they choose.

What needs to be looked at is the item being profiled. When I am profiling the parent profile, I am actually profiling the "container" only, not the disc(s). So the case type that needs to be chosen is the one that represents that "container" the best.

When I am profiling the actual disc (child profile), then I am looking at the "case" that holds the disc.

Quote:

What needs to be looked at is the item being profiled. When I am profiling the parent profile, I am actually profiling the "container" only, not the disc(s). So the case type that needs to be chosen is the one that represents that "container" the best.

Quote:
Quoting ya_shin:

Quote:

What needs to be looked at is the item being profiled. When I am profiling the parent profile, I am actually profiling the "container" only, not the disc(s). So the case type that needs to be chosen is the one that represents that "container" the best.

I agree, but that still leaves room for interpretation.
A single multi-disk Digipak is still a container for all the disks, even if it has an extra sleeve around it (slip case or slip cover). It's no different from a single movie Keepcase that has a similar sleeve around it.
So that would make a casetype of 'Digipak' and 'Keepcase' respectively.
Yet, I know from the other thread that you think differently.

Quote:
Here it is folks! A list of CASE TYPES with an image so you can tell what they are.

Select the case type as you would see it on the shelf at the store in it's original release.
     


Box Set (Slip Case): ("Slip Case" is not selectable in DVD Profiler. Select "Box Set" for this case type.)





Slip Cover (Sleeve): (not selectable in DVD Profiler) List as case type contained within.

Quote:
I think there are 4 "schools of thought".
1. Rifter: anything that contains multiple movies or episodes of a TV series must have 'boxset' as casetype. While this is indeed very simple, it somehow doesn't refer to Casetype but is a way to easily identify box set profiles.
2. Dan: just look at the OUTER package. If that has a Slip Cover, ignore it and move INWARD. If it has a Slipcase, then the casetype is Boxset. This rule is just not logical. Why would you ignore a Slipcover, but not a Slipcase ? Also, it is still not clear to me if you would then also use 'Boxset' for a single-movie keepcase inside a slipcase.
3. Anonymous: just apply Dan's rule, but include Slipcovers as well in deciding to call it a Boxset casetype. This would at least be more logical. Yet it doesn't fit well with single-movie profiles where I think no one would defend calling those Boxsets.
4. T!M (and myself): start looking at the INNER package and work your way out. The first inner package you find (starting from the disk itself) is the casetype for the disk itself. The first inner package that holds ALL disks is the casetype for the parent profile.

I think only 1 and 4 are simple yet logical. 3 is acceptable although I don't like the single-movie exception that is required. And 2 just doesn't make much sense to me since it is more exception than rule.

Quote:
Why is it so difficult to follow the images given?

Is there something we missed or didn't clarify?