DisplayBug:20088 Wrong names selected for vt display?

DisplayBug:20088 Wrong names selected for vt display? OPEN I have an anthology where an author's name is consistently misspelled and so I set up a VT. It appears the ISFDB display has the names flipped around. The author is spelled as “Griffiths” in my publication but it should be “Griffith.” The relevant line currently reads:
 * 10 • Honeymoon in Space • (1900) • shortstory by George Griffith (aka A Honeymoon in Space (Excerpt)) [ as by George Griffiths ]
 * I believe the line should be
 * 10 • Honeymoon in Space • (1900) • shortstory by George Griffiths (aka A Honeymoon in Space (Excerpt)) [ as by George Griffith ]
 * If you click on Honeymoon in Space it does show the correct author names. Note, that the same error occurs further down for The Paradox Men. --Marc Kupper 01:09, 15 Jan 2007 (CST)


 * Well, I'll take input from people on how this should be phrased to reduce confusion, but my reading is that the current display is correct. The story was indeed written BY George Griffith, and it was published AS BY George Griffiths. If you look at the Griffith bibliography, it also says:

- A Honeymoon in Space (Excerpt) (1900) * Variant Title: Honeymoon in Space (1900) [as by George Griffiths ]


 * So the phrasing directly models that found in the Griffth bibliography. Alvonruff 20:40, 16 Jan 2007 (CST)


 * Looks right to me unless Marc had something else in mind? Ahasuerus 01:36, 17 Jan 2007 (CST)


 * At the time I was in the middle of verifying a publication meaning I was going down a list of titles and author names to make sure everything matched perfectly. When I got to the ISFDB line that says "Honeymoon in Space by George Griffiths" the brain spits out "err, no..., the pub says Griffiths." Your explanation makes perfect sense though in looking at the contents list it still gives me pause. Would this work?
 * "Honeymoon in Space by George Griffiths" (originally A Honeymoon in Space (Excerpt) by George Griffith)
 * (I got curious about the “(Excerpt)” and dug into this. It turns out to be an excerpt of a fixup… The entire story was serialized in six issues of Pearson's Magazine as “Stories of Other Worlds” around in 1898 and/or 1900 and then a fixup was created called A Honeymoon In Space around 1901. The excerpt found in anthologies is the first 2/3rds of chapter XIII. The original serials seem to be at http://www.forgottenfutures.com/game/ff2/ and the fixup is at http://www.forgottenfutures.com/game/ff2/honeymn.htm.) Marc Kupper (talk) 01:29, 19 Jan 2007 (CST)


 * My two cents: I don't think I like your alternative formulation as much as the current display. Currently we always get "by canonical-name", with a parenthesis telling us if the particular publication used an alias or a variant form of the name.  Your suggestion puts the names that vary first -- I think this looks odder, over a list of titles in a bibliography, than placing the uniform canonical name next to the title and then showing variations. Mike Christie (talk) 14:16, 19 Jan 2007 (CST)


 * I concur that canonical names are best displayed first. I think it's the expected behavior, so I would go with the Rule of Least Surprise. Ahasuerus 14:20, 19 Jan 2007 (CST)


 * I would completely agree that canonical names are best displayed first in author bibliographies but my comment was about the contents list of a publication where my observation is that it does not appear to match what's in a publication. If there are no variant titles you will see:
 * Publication Contents:
 * Story 1 • shortstory by Author1
 * Story 2 • shortstory by Author2
 * Story 3 • shortstory by Author3
 * Let’s say that Author2 is a small variation of the canonical name which I’ll call Author4. If I add a vt for Story 2 from Author2 to Author4 (the parent) the display is now.
 * Publication Contents:
 * Story 1 • shortstory by Author1
 * Story 2 • shortstory by Author4 [as by Author2 ]
 * Story 3 • shortstory by Author3
 * I believe the average person would assume the publication states “Story 2 by Author4” (who is also known as Author2) and would not realize that the publication actually credits Author2 for Story 2, that Author4 is the author’s canonical name, and that Author4 probably was never mentioned in the publication.
 * If the story title varies then we have:
 * Publication Contents:
 * Story 1 • shortstory by Author1
 * Story 2 • shortstory by Author4 (aka Story Title 2) [as by Author2 ]
 * Story 3 • shortstory by Author3
 * Here there is even more of a disconnect between what’s stated in the publication and how ISFDB presents it as the average person would see that the publication must have “Story 2 by Author4” and that the story is also known as “Story Title 2 by Author2.”


 * I believe that while the present display is "correct" that it takes a fairly astute reader that's aware of ISFDB bibliographic conventions to understand who was credited in the publication. It also does not help in that the VT relationship is introduced using the phrase "as by." Try this the next time you are in the fern bar and run into a person of interest. "Define as", "define by", "so what does as by mean?" :-) Marc Kupper 03:09, 21 Jan 2007 (CST)