[mb-style] Disc Numbers for singles

[Cristov Russell]

> On 5/24/05, Cristov Russell <wolfsong at endlessforest.net> wrote:
> > I'm of the opinion that there is no real reason not keep the disc 
> > number, whether we change the format or not as Michelle suggests. I 
> > don't agree with just (#) because it would just seem very 
> odd to me in 
> > a listing but a word other than "disc" could work, I just 
> can't think 
> > of anything appropriate right now.
> 
> Just as for albums: if singles are sold/released separately, 
> the disc number should be left out. That's my opinion.
> 
> Jan (zout)

Even if the intent of the packaging is to have the consumer join them
together? That doesn't seem right. In some cases I as a consumer might never
know that they were originally sold separately since someone may have sold
them to me (used) repackaged. Why would I then think they were not a set.
The distinction with albums is that the content is usually very different
and there is a stronger possibility that the next disc in the set is sold
further in the future. With singles, they a probably released at the same
time or within weeks of each other and the title song generally appears on
both discs.

Cristov (wolfsong)