Nikki wrote:
Basically, yes. The overall thread so far has been that:
Some points to add: Dustin exhaustively tried to state why we *should* allow virtual duplicates - which I think was unnecessary because everyone who still wants to argue against that is a bit out of reality. ;) Also it was said that we might want to make use of this relationship for displaying duplicate releases together with the official ones (?) and let all changes to one of the releases (except the titles) reflect on the other ones automatically. I'd like to see more concrete plans for that.
* We can avoid the majority of relationship clusters by linking to the official release in the artist's native language (presumably in their usual country of release).
This point is a bit hazy to me. What about cases where the official release of a Japanese band is in English/Latin and someone creates a virtual Japanese/Kana duplicate? "Artist's native language" is problematic in my eyes. Of course you could say the English/Latin one is the official release and therefore everything links there. But what if there are several official ones of which none can be seen as most "native"? This might sound theoretically but I think identifying the "main release" can be problematic.
Expanding on the last point, there will still be some cases where clusters would be possible, but focusing on those is silly. We currently have thousands of transliterations which are lacking a relationship because a handful of examples (which, in some cases, are just theoretical) are tricky to handle.
I would like to hear more about those tricky examples. :) I guess they have been discussed to death before... sorry, didn't read the other threads. Simon (Shepard) _______________________________________________ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
