Regarding the UPCs, won't removing the spaces make certain UPCs alike that would otherwise be different?
Using a simple 12 digit number is as much for member convienience as it is functional as a search field. Right now we have two types, and since the search function recognizes spaces in between searches are hit or miss at best. We needed to set a standard so the whole database can make use of barcodes/UPC's. I've added at least 200 UPC's of my own to the database with spaces in them, but since that type was only used by a minority even I had to agree it was for the best.
I think it'd be better to have 3 or 4 search results which include the one your looking for than turn up nothing at all.
I agree that it would be more convenient and easy to keep it uniform, but I was more concerned with using the data in the database to find relationships between items. I.e. if two products have different publishers on the packaging, but the same producer digits in the UPC, it's likely that the publishers have more in common than meets the eye...and this info could be useful for people trying to document certain items or regional releases. In other words, if someone were interested in collecting all items from a particular company and its subsidiaries, then all that person would have to do (assuming the database would be complete with information) is to type in the producer digits in a UPC search form (which would also be possible with the current method, but may yield more and incorrect/unwanted results). It's really only a minor thing, so it's not too big of a deal, but it's really impossible to work backwards once the spaces/dashes have been removed, so that's why I thought it might be a good idea to change the guideline to using dashes or something of the like (and make the search field similar to the field used when inserting the cd key during a product install). Just an idea
Author
