Why are the edit boxes for character names so much smaller than displayed character names

  • 4
  • Question
  • Updated 6 months ago
  • Answered
It's a little odd that when you go to edit a character name, the edit box becomes tiny compared to the previously displayed character name. This makes correct editing more difficult as you cannot see the whole character name that you are editing. See below:

Photo of Adrian

Adrian, Champion

  • 1091 Posts
  • 1235 Reply Likes

Posted 6 months ago

  • 4
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 6578 Posts
  • 8131 Reply Likes
Thank you, Adrian! This has been gnawing at me as well for a long time!
Photo of Adrian

Adrian, Champion

  • 1091 Posts
  • 1235 Reply Likes
Me too. I just happened to be editing something else for a Get Satisfaction problem and decided to finally post it. This really sucks for animation, like The Simpsons, which never has a large enough box. There is no reason the box cannot grow to the size of the input, even if that means wrapping text.
Photo of Michelle

Michelle, Official Rep

  • 11961 Posts
  • 8022 Reply Likes
Hi Adrian and Jeorj -

Just so I understand the issue before bringing it to our tech teams' attention, are you referring to the size of the box where you are making the correction (in red) verses the uncorrected item (in green)?

(Edited)
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 6578 Posts
  • 8131 Reply Likes
The form field inside the box one highlighted in red, to be exact.
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 6578 Posts
  • 8131 Reply Likes
In the underlying HTML, the element has a "name" attribute with a value like for example "o.1.cast.existing.1.edit.char" (where the second "1" refers to the serial number of specific item to be edited). The "size" attribute has a value of "20", which refers to the number of normal-width capital letters in the role description, or something like that. We'd be inclined to assume that 20 is enough, but apparently it is not always so, because sometimes the data field contains more than just a character's name but also the segment identifier, or multiple characters' names separated by forward slashes.
Photo of Adrian

Adrian, Champion

  • 1091 Posts
  • 1235 Reply Likes
Yes, that's it. It would also help if the box could grow as more text as entered. I edit "The Simpsons" and it becomes a hassle because the main cast, particularly Dan Castellaneta, play multiple characters and easily fills the small edit box.
Photo of ljdoncel

ljdoncel, Champion

  • 744 Posts
  • 1460 Reply Likes
Hi, Adrian, Jeorj and Michelle:

I asked myself that same question several months ago. I even looked at the numbers in order to suggest a new default width, but ultimately I didn't post the results here because I felt I was the only one who suffered it and that the staff had other priority issues to fix.

Including spaces, the character box currently displays inputs of around 20 characters long (since most people use proportional fonts, actual number varies depending on the entered text). That length can accommodate about 91.3% of all the character names in the database (90.1% if we exclude the 12% of acting credits that has no character name); in other words, 1 out of 11 character names will exceed the visible limit. Ideally the box should grow as more text is entered but, in the meantime, If we could extend the width to, say, 60 characters, only 1 out of around 720 character names would be "trimmed".

(I could recalculate using newest data, but I don't think the results would be much different)
As of 22 Dec 2017 (from 32,614,967 acting credits):
Photo of Will

Will, Official Rep

  • 3189 Posts
  • 3518 Reply Likes
Exceptional work as ever ljdoncel!
Photo of Adrian

Adrian, Champion

  • 1091 Posts
  • 1235 Reply Likes
If less than 10% of character names are of lengths greater than the size of the edit box, I must be incredibly unlucky as I see this on a daily basis!
Photo of Vincent Fournols

Vincent Fournols

  • 2901 Posts
  • 4837 Reply Likes
No, I guess that:
1. you are more thorough, and
2. probably dealing with credits which are longer than the standards of previous decades.

Overall, it does not surprise me.
Photo of ljdoncel

ljdoncel, Champion

  • 744 Posts
  • 1460 Reply Likes
Thank you very much, Will! Always happy to help .

Adrian, I think both Vincent and you are right; here's a short breakdown (note the "Within segments" bullet):

CHARACTER NAMES LONGER THAN 20 CHARS
  • ALL TITLES: 8.7% (of 32,614,967 character names) are longer than 20 chars.
    --- Excluding zero-length character names:  9.9% (of 28,690,054)

  • By type of title:
    --- FILMS: 6.7% (of 8,061,466) ~ [8.3% if zero-length names are excluded]
    --- MADE FOR VIDEO (V): 4.8% (of 1,255,273) ~ [9.8%]
    --- MADE FOR TV (TV): 11.5% (of 1,531,242) ~ [13.1%]
    --- SERIES (PARENT LEVEL): 10.6% (of 722,602) ~ [12.9%]
    --- SERIES (EPISODES): 9.5% (of 20,924,684) ~ [10.1%]
    --- VIDEOGAMES (VG): 17.9% (of 119,700) ~ [20.5%]

  • Within segments: Of 78,301 character names that include the string segment...
    --- 96.6% are longer than 20 chars.
    --- 48.0% are longer than 40 chars.
    --- 10.4% are longer than 60 chars.

  • By number of characters portrayed by a same actor:
    --- 1 character: 8.9% (of 28,137,474 credits) are longer than 20 chars.
    --- 2 characters: 57.8% (of 442,529).
    --- 3 characters: 88.7% (of 63,574).
    --- 4 characters: 99.5% (of 21,816).
    --- 5 characters: 99.9% (of 8,793).
    --- No acting credit with more than 5 characters is shorter than 20 chars.

  • By decade:
    --- [Pre-1890]: 100.0% non-blank characters (6), of which 16.7% are longer than 20 chars ~ Gilbert Domm in Sallie Gardner at a Gallop (1878)
    --- [1890-1899]: 78.3% non-blank (844), of which 3.7% are long.
    --- [1900-1909]: 54.3% non-blank (4,832), of which 9.2% are long.
    --- [1910-1919]: 70.5% non-blank (149,307), of which 16.2% are long.
    --- [1920-1929]: 67.3% non-blank (119,865), of which 10.3% are long.
    --- [1930-1939]: 82.6% non-blank (270,397), of which 14.1% are long.
    --- [1940-1949]: 84.1% non-blank (283,583), of which 14.5% are long.
    --- [1950-1959]: 80.0% non-blank (626,172), of which 11.2% are long.
    --- [1960-1969]: 79.4% non-blank (1,061,902), of which 10.2% are long.
    --- [1970-1979]: 78.6% non-blank (1,314,054), of which 11.3% are long.
    --- [1980-1989]: 79.7% non-blank (1,770,285), of which 10.4% are long.
    --- [1990-1999]: 86.1% non-blank (3,321,920), of which 10.5% are long.
    --- [2000-2009]: 89.8% non-blank (7,986,269), of which 9.8% are long.
    --- [2010-2019]: 92.4% non-blank (11,398,118), of which 9.3% are long.
    --- [Post-2019]: 84.5% non-blank (337), of which 10.4% are long.
    --- [????]: 84.3% non-blank (382,160), of which 7.7% are long.

Photo of Will

Will, Official Rep

  • 3189 Posts
  • 3518 Reply Likes
Hi Adrian,

Thanks for reporting, I've cut a ticket for our tech teams to take a look.

Regards,
Will
Photo of Will

Will, Official Rep

  • 3189 Posts
  • 3518 Reply Likes
Hi all,

Thanks again for raising this. We are working to improve the way people contribute cast credits and this issue will not be present in future versions of this UI. Stay tuned for updates.

Regards,
Will