On 09/08/06, Rod Begbie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 8/9/06, Brian G. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> is "virtual" really the best name for the release type?
> rather than using a word and forcing a new meaning why not call it what it
> really is.. a translation.
> i don't think mb needs anymore confusing BadTerminology
Compare the metadata surrounding
http://musicbrainz.org/album/0900aa86-9bbd-4424-b0dd-bfd2942ea02f.html
and http://musicbrainz.org/album/f470c26b-0beb-44d0-b49e-4caa02379b76.html.
They've got different DiscIDs associated (10 on one, 2 on the other,
no cross-over), so which titles you get when you lookup a disk are,
essentially, random. One has an album AR. The other has a track AR.
And the associated PUIDs on tracks differ.
It's a mess, and all because music geeks want their MP3s tagged in
different ways.
no, it reflects actual differences between the tracklisting on
different versions of this album.
personally i agree it should be merged, but it is not an analogous
situation to these "virtual" releases.
_______________________________________________
Musicbrainz-style mailing list
Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
