On Jan 3, 2008 7:16 PM, Brian Schweitzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > We would like all ARs to be meaningful. > We would like everyone to agree on just what any given AR level implies. > We would love if all release level ARs applied only to all tracks, but we > are in agreement that: > 1) This isn't true for many of those release level ARs we already have, > and > 2) Many liners simply don't present enough info for us to be able to say > this, so either > a) This info ends up being put in annotations, where it is much > less > useful from a database and discographical point of view > b) This info ends up in release-level ARs. > 3) AR info ought to not inherit from releases to tracks, nor be assumed > to do so. > 4) ARs fall into three groups: > Type 1) Some ARs apply best at only the track level, if there's > solid info to support that it does apply to that specific > track, but > end up in release-level ARs as "fuzzy" data when the specific > track(s) are unable to be (yet) identified. > Type 2) Some ARs apply only at the release level, and not to any > track, and are not ever "fuzzy" at this level. > Type 3) Some ARs can apply at either level - photography, liner > notes, production, etc.
That crashing noise was the sky falling after Brian and I just came to almost exactly the same conclusions. So +1 what he said above. -- Lauri Watts _______________________________________________ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
