those closer we reflect liners, those more factual and useful the database becomes. i'm tired of discogs shitting on us in this regard :(
I agree that we should be entering the credits as they are listed on the liner notes, not what we interpret the credit to be. If its says "music written by" that's exactly what we should be crediting it as, not guessing that it may mean something else. Same goes for recorded, engineered and every other credit. We spend far too much time argueing over ARs and what they mean. The problem is that not every release uses the sames terminology for the same role. So either we guess (which is wrong) or we create a more flexible AR system that allows credits to be entered exactly as they appear on the liner notes. You could argue that this will mean we will have loads of incorrect ARs, but we have loads of incorrect ARs now, because people are trying to guess when matching the actual liner notes with the limited ARs we have. And we do have a voting system to catch anything that is obviously wrong.
oh, and discogs isn't that great itself, I could pick holes in almost every punk release they have listed there :p At least we get new submissions entered without waiting 3 months for someone to vote no on some petty error.
Mud _______________________________________________ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
