hmm. i see - so these would all be check boxes? it seems to me the format of http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/ProducerRelationshipType and http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/EngineerRelationshipType (of which I emulated) should be very similar.
I think they should either both have one primary (producer / engineer) & multiple attributes (co-producer, executive producer, additional / audio, sound, live sound, mixed...), or just multiple seperate roles on the same wikipage (as per http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/EngineerRelationshipType is now). The latter makes more sense to me. it doesn't seem right to have the 2 being different in their layout, yeah? On 12/04/06, Don Redman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 12 Apr 2006 16:50:21 +0200, Chris Bransden wrote: > > > responded. anyone else? i'm requesting a veto now, as i think this one > > is really good to go. > > Did I get this right, that both {co-} and {executive} are attributes? If > so they should be listed in the attribute sections just for formal > correctness. > > This is not a veto. I am for this. > > DonRedman > > > > -- > Words that are written in CamelCase refer to WikiPages: > Visit http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/ the best MusicBrainz documentation > around! :-) > _______________________________________________ > Musicbrainz-style mailing list > Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org > http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style > _______________________________________________ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
