On 23 April 2012 18:30, jesus2099 wrote:
>
> lorenz pressler wrote
>>
>> recording -> disamig. comment only
>> tracklist -> if its on the tracklist then it should be included in the
>> trackname
>>
>
> Well yes, and I think it’s even quite obvious enough not to have to write
> another hundred octe
lorenz pressler wrote
>
> recording -> disamig. comment only
> tracklist -> if its on the tracklist then it should be included in the
> trackname
>
Well yes, and I think it’s even quite obvious enough not to have to write
another hundred octets of guidelines. :)
Tristan.
-
mb : http://mu
On 4 April 2012 16:15, Per Øyvind Øygard wrote:
> On 3 April 2012 22:15, Kuno Woudt wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> On 02/04/12 17:23, Andii Hughes wrote:
>>> Where I think things get fuzzy is if you have a title X on an album,
>>> but a compilation lists "X (album version)" (i.e. there is not
>>> cross-r
On 3 April 2012 22:15, Kuno Woudt wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 02/04/12 17:23, Andii Hughes wrote:
>> Where I think things get fuzzy is if you have a title X on an album,
>> but a compilation lists "X (album version)" (i.e. there is not
>> cross-release agreement). Here I think "(album version)" is
>>
Hello,
On 02/04/12 17:23, Andii Hughes wrote:
> Where I think things get fuzzy is if you have a title X on an album,
> but a compilation lists "X (album version)" (i.e. there is not
> cross-release agreement). Here I think "(album version)" is
> superfluous as its the 'standard' version. Thus I
2012/4/3 Andii Hughes
> On 2 April 2012 22:17, Philip Jägenstedt wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 22:58, lorenz pressler wrote:
> >> Am 02.04.2012, 22:36 Uhr, schrieb Philip Jägenstedt >:
> >>
> >>> http://musicbrainz.org/edit/16971109 reminded me of this issue, which
> >>> I haven't understo
On 2 April 2012 22:17, Philip Jägenstedt wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 22:58, lorenz pressler wrote:
>> Am 02.04.2012, 22:36 Uhr, schrieb Philip Jägenstedt :
>>
>>> http://musicbrainz.org/edit/16971109 reminded me of this issue, which
>>> I haven't understood since the introduction of NGS.
>>>
Am 03.04.2012, 00:29 Uhr, schrieb Andii Hughes :
> There is ETI that should remain in the
> title; remix and edit titles.
i agree ofc!
--
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/
On 2 April 2012 23:19, lorenz pressler wrote:
> Am 02.04.2012, 23:17 Uhr, schrieb Philip Jägenstedt :
>
>>> afair:
>>> recording -> disamig. comment only
>>> tracklist -> if its on the tracklist then it should be included in the
>>> trackname
>>
>> Is this documented anywhere, and is it how everyo
Am 02.04.2012, 23:17 Uhr, schrieb Philip Jägenstedt :
>> afair:
>> recording -> disamig. comment only
>> tracklist -> if its on the tracklist then it should be included in the
>> trackname
>
> Is this documented anywhere, and is it how everyone is actually
> editing? Is no one using the recording-
On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 22:58, lorenz pressler wrote:
> Am 02.04.2012, 22:36 Uhr, schrieb Philip Jägenstedt :
>
>> http://musicbrainz.org/edit/16971109 reminded me of this issue, which
>> I haven't understood since the introduction of NGS.
>>
>> One the one hand, disambiguation comments aren't used
Am 02.04.2012, 22:36 Uhr, schrieb Philip Jägenstedt :
> http://musicbrainz.org/edit/16971109 reminded me of this issue, which
> I haven't understood since the introduction of NGS.
>
> One the one hand, disambiguation comments aren't used for tagging
> (right?) so moving information there would pro
http://musicbrainz.org/edit/16971109 reminded me of this issue, which
I haven't understood since the introduction of NGS.
One the one hand, disambiguation comments aren't used for tagging
(right?) so moving information there would produce some broken tags
for people who use normalized tagging in P
13 matches
Mail list logo
