On Thu, 19 May 2011 11:59:53 +0200, Frederic Da Vitoria <[email protected]> wrote:
>> But I'm leaning towards just accepting the version on the liner for >> tracknames. Or making standardization of catalogue optional, if you >> think >> it could work. >> > > Maybe you are right, maybe that level of standardization is not really > necessary. It seems not to be really needed for our recordings listing > and > search purposes, but since recordings should be used by Picard for > tagging, > then maybe some users will be happy if at least some level of > standardization is reached. I'll probably never search locally my files > by > catalog number, but maybe some user will, and then he would be happy if > at > least for each catalog spacing was consistent (because for some searching > tools, B.## (1 "word") is completely different fom B. ## (2 words). > This is just tracknames, recording & works will be standardized. But if you use tracknames for tagging, the catalogue should probably be standardised. We'll have to make that page. What if we use what's on the liner for "opus", but standardize the specific catalogues? BTW I haven't found anyone without a space before the number yet. Maybe "insert a space before the number" will work. There's a start in http://musicbrainz.org/doc/Talk:Classical_Style_Guide#Works_catalog & http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_von_Werkverzeichnissen_der_Musik /symphonick _______________________________________________ MusicBrainz-style mailing list [email protected] http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
