That's my sense, re the 'Track From' AR part here, which I've mentioned but not yet drafted. That one, to me, seems specific to the "single from" AR, without the need for some track equivalent of the "supporting release" AR. I see it as a track-RG AR.
I don't think this track AR would duplicate a single from release group AR. Yes, both would normally apply each time, but the use is different. ARs sometimes apply "downwards", but they don't ever (iirc) apply "upwards". Here, the meaning of each is different, as well. One is talking about the single, as a whole, being from the album. The other identifies which specific track(s) are the ones from that album. To take it to an extreme where the 2 ARs then don't both apply at the same time, theoretically, you could imagine a band releasing two albums at the same time, with overlapping singles from them. So SingleA could be from both AlbumA and AlbumB, but TrackN is only going to be from one of those 2 albums. I don't think this duplicates anything in the Recording entity either (post-NGS). That merges together the instances of tracks on different releases, but it won't help do anything where the version/recording of the track is not the same on the single and album. Work would like the tracks, but at an entirely different level, and with different meanings. Where it seems problematic, however, is in making the AR work post-NGS (hence my not drafting it yet). As a track-track AR, it works, though it has the problem of needing a new track-track AR for each new instance of a single. However, post-NGS, that track AR moves to the recording, which doesn't mean the same things here - you'd now have the recording, on the album, with an AR saying it was taken from the album... Brian On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 3:23 AM, Per Starbäck <per.starb...@gmail.com>wrote: > > In any case, if we define a single "taken from" an album as simply "it's > a single that > > has a track on it which was also on album Foo", then it remains true even > if the single > > and the album are released 10 years apart. > > But preferrably there'd be an AR between those *tracks* then. In that > case, what is the point > of this release-release relation which gives no more information? > > _______________________________________________ > MusicBrainz-style mailing list > MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org > http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style >
_______________________________________________ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
