Well, I suspect that mundane name simply isn't going to be available publically, for the reason that's obvious from the above: there are too many people who would bring out pitchforks. Besides, as siderea reminded me, it's against SCA policy to publish the correlation publically. So that's a non-starter. (And wasn't the intent in the first place.)
That said, the system is explicitly designed for cross-references. So if you know one of a person's SCA names, and that name is known to the OP, it should have all of their awards collated together and links from all of their names. That makes most cases manageable. If all you know is the mundane name, you're out of luck, but that's an unusual case.
Is it useful to have a place to hang (where known) the members of a collective?
Well, it's currently tracked where feasible, sometimes quite laboriously. Since the DB is mainly intended to cope with all current practice, we definitely want to incorporate that. (Note, however, that it is typically done on an award-by-award basis -- this is a hassle, but necessary given the changing composition of collectives. That's why the "As Part Of" field is needed on Bestowal.)
(no subject)
Date: 2008-11-23 03:20 am (UTC)That said, the system is explicitly designed for cross-references. So if you know one of a person's SCA names, and that name is known to the OP, it should have all of their awards collated together and links from all of their names. That makes most cases manageable. If all you know is the mundane name, you're out of luck, but that's an unusual case.
Is it useful to have a place to hang (where known) the members of a collective?
Well, it's currently tracked where feasible, sometimes quite laboriously. Since the DB is mainly intended to cope with all current practice, we definitely want to incorporate that. (Note, however, that it is typically done on an award-by-award basis -- this is a hassle, but necessary given the changing composition of collectives. That's why the "As Part Of" field is needed on Bestowal.)