Re: [mb-users] CD 9 vs. "disc 9"

On Fri, Jun 06, 2003 at 03:39:54AM +0300, Jukka Santala wrote:
> I recently added a release titled "Bonus CD 9: Suomi Pop & Rock '98" to 
> the MusicBrainz database. Some moderator apparently corrected it, 
> justifiably under the style-rules I suppose, to "Bonus (disc 9)".

Given the context, your original title seems correct. 9 is effectively the
volume number in this case.

> 
> I think the style-guidance is in error in this case. "CD 6" is part of 
> the release title, not an extra attribute. Ideally, I'd like to see 
> (disc X) used only in case of the discs being actually inside the same 
> physical album cover, but I'm not sure how feasible this is.

I agree. I don't think this guideline was ever intended to contradict your
thinking here. Maybe it needs to be made clearer.

> As an aside, is there accepted policy for entering cover-mixes? Ie. 
> where one or more bands performs covers of (one or) several other 
> artists on a single album? How does this picture change if it's 
> classical or neo-classical music? There's an entry in the WiKi detailing 
> some of the cases, but I'm wondering if there's any accepted quick rules 
> of thumb.

For the moment, I'd say just use the covering artists and song titles as 
normal, and leave out the covered artists, at least for non-classical.

Regards,
Neil Cafferkey


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:  Etnus, makers of TotalView, The best
thread debugger on the planet. Designed with thread debugging features
you've never dreamed of, try TotalView 6 free at www.etnus.com.