Chris B writes:
> i've always thought that 'special notes' section was a load of rubbish
OK, very little consensus :-)
> often (VERY often) there is a single edit for singles - imagine the
> following single tracklisting (as printed on liner notes):
>
> 1) Funky Shit
> 2) Funky Shit (album version)
If we leave it this way, we have two different tracks referred to by the
same name ("Funky Shit", here, and "Funky Shit" on the hypothetical
album), and the same track referred to by two different names ("Funky
Shit (album version)", here and "Funky Shit" on the album again). I
think it ought to be:
1) Funky Shit (edit)
2) Funky Shit
However, perhaps this bothers me more than it bothers anyone else.
We're trying to build a database of music, not a database of
transcriptions of packaging. (I've still got all my Goldie CDs out on
the table and the sleeves are just *full* of misspellings and mistakes.)
Or am I wrong about this?
> i say why ever get rid of this info? yeah it can be redundant, but who
> cares? where's the harm in keeping it? i see more harm in dropping it as
> easy as we do.
The wording that's there now was aimed (only, unfortunately) at the case
where any such information is redundant. I think both cases are valid,
however. How can we edit it to make more sense?
--
things change.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Musicbrainz-style mailing list
Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
