On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 16:24:50 +0200, Andrew Conkling <andrew.conkl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I had an idea regarding BoxSetNameStyle, in the case where box sets' > releases are also available individually. > > An example: > http://musicbrainz.org/release-group/40ed05d3-8239-3d1a-a90a-543773898117.html > > has four releases, two of which have a composer that applies for the > entire release, thus they have the composer's artist as the release > artist. > > A corollary for release titles: what if a box set was grouped together > in a release group, but if individual releases are also available > separately, the releases within the release group would simply receive > that separate release title? Couple problems. Many boxsets have discs of new/unreleased content. These discs necessarily need to have boxset naming, and need to be linked to. Linking "Johnny's Boxset Beats (disc 5: The Returnening)" as the next disc for "Johnny Sings the Blues", seems rather odd to me. Also, individual releases will very often share release groups with regional dupes, remasters etc. Can you really justify moving these to a boxset group and not changing the name? Would it not make more sense to make a dupe with boxset titling and link the discs together, so interested parties can traverse the disc chains to get the whole boxset? Anyway, doesn't NGS solve this with per-release-event release titles (at least so my testing indicates)? Ideally we should probably register release/disc names seperately and have Picard construct the boxset names, but yeah... -- Per / Wizzcat _______________________________________________ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
