On Aug 9, 2006, at 12:43 PM, Rod Begbie 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
Agreed, agreed and agreed.
I'm uneasy about this proposal, because it splits the data about the
exact same release. PUIDs, ARs, DiscIDs etc are tied to one release.
Agreed -- we'd be adding tons of confusing duplication if we started
adding these to BOTH releases. No good.
Encouraging this kind of split is A Bad Idea, in my eyes. Either do
this with a DB schema-change, or not at all, IMO.
That's pretty much where I stand too.
We recently agreed that MusicBrainz' primary focus is to create a
database of music information. Tagger users desires are secondary and
tools should tweak the data to suit the tagger users. Its is not ok
for tagger users to dictate the DB structure. This fits issue falls
into the same category.
Transliterations/translations must be done RIGHT at the schema level.
I'm currently trying to raise some money to get started working on
NGS...
Shepard says:
Listen to Don: rules follow practice. With tons and tons of
translations and transliterations already being in the database you
cannot just go and make a guideline not to allow that. It's
unrealistic.
Rules that follow from bad practices are bad rules.
--
--ruaok Somewhere in Texas a village is *still* missing its idiot.
Robert Kaye -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://mayhem-chaos.net
_______________________________________________
Musicbrainz-style mailing list
Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
