2006/10/3, Don Redman [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I have entered your wording to
<http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/ClassicalReleaseArtistStyle> (as rev 1) and
then reformulated it a bit (rev 2).
Let me just say this is a great and clean work.
Point 3 is already what MB users are doing, and I believe (I may be wrong)
what the current rules recommend. So this is not a change,
this is only repeating here something which was already set elsewhere (I
really should find where ;-) )
There are lot of famous edit wars as Trongersoll and Mannheim Steamroller
http://musicbrainz.org/show/edit/?editid=2490348 that came up to CSGD along
with a "coverness" discussion started by me which is partially on topic.
Point 1 would only divert VA releases, which
a - would be a good thing from the VA point of view (the less things go to
VA, the better)
b - would not change much the MB semantics (VA isn't very meaningful from a
semantic point of view)
I'd rather disagree with point 2 for two reasons:
a - the limits will always be difficult to define and we risk edit wars
b - precisely, it changes the database semantics, worse it makes the
semantics vary depending on something that is, to say the least, not
obvious (from a dumb computer's point of view): the release title. =
BTW, I fully agree with Frederic POV: 1 and 2 would just fit and not harm, 2
is really more questionabale.
Ciao
MArco (ClutchEr2)
_______________________________________________
Musicbrainz-style mailing list
Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
