> On Jul 30, 2021, at 3:20 PM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, 30 Jul 2021 at 23:15, Craig Russell <apache....@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >>> On Jul 30, 2021, at 3:11 PM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Also, I thought we had abandoned the idea of requiring the >>> family-first checkbox. >> >> Nope. Just recently we received a document from a person who filled the form >> with their family name first and the document was filed with the assumption >> that the family name was last. >> >> The Family First checkbox will prevent such mistakes in future. > > Why is that a mistake?
Srsly? You don't think that the secretary should care to register "Craig Russell" instead of "Russell Craig"? He is a completely different person. That is a separate issue. File names have to be unique within a directory, so ensuring a consistent order for the file name parts *may* help to detect some duplicates. However it is by no means infallible, especially since the practice of changing the order of names is a relatively recent introduction. Also, people may provide additional or fewer given names with replacement ICLAs. People change names. In any case, there will be different people with the same name. The current practice is to ask such people to provide an extra name -- I find that unnecessary and intrusive. I think we should file under a different key, such as email (or just UUID?), and provide alternate means of checking for possible duplicates. For example, are there any existing ICLAs with the same names, regardless of order? This would be trivial to check from an index file. Note that it's not just the file name that has to be unique: we currently use folders where there is a replacement ICLA. The folder name stem has to be different from the file name stem. So there already has to be processing to check for possible duplicate stems. That could be extended as necessary. Sebb
