AlbumTitle proposal [WAS: Re: Title styles revised (was:
[mb-style] redundant ExtraTitleInformation)]
fox.box at gmail.com
Tue Jan 17 23:28:02 UTC 2006
On 1/17/06, Don Redman <donredman at gmx.de> wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 23:07:29 +0100, Björn Krombholz wrote:
> > You are probably referring to the ordering section in TrackTitle? But
> > I'm not sure if this is necessary for AlbumTitle as well, because all
> > album titles I can think of follow this strict order: 1. main title 2.
> > sub-title 3. volume number 4. disc number (with optional disc-title)
> > 5. featuring artist. In which cases do you apply a different ordering?
> The Subtitle can be a subtitle to the albun, the volume or the disc:
> MainTitle: SubTitle, VolumeNumber (DiscNumber)
> MainTitle, VolumeNumber: SubTitle (DiscNumber)
> MainTitle, VolumeNumber (DiscNumber: SubTitle)
> are all possible.
Ah, MissunderstandingDonRedman, Part x+1. ;=)
SubTitle is only related to MainTitle, while VolumeNumber can have a
VolumeTitle, and DiscNumber and additional DiscTitle. Those are not
SubTitles in the literal sense, but real (main) titles of entities.
I will add those to the page, the result will be an ordering like:
MainTitle [SubTitle(s)] [VolumeNumber [VolumeTitle]] [DiscNumber
It might appear a bit too complicated with all those different names,
but IMO it's a very good idea to have distinctable names for
distinctable attributes, as we recognized a lot of problems with
synonyms in the past.
More information about the Musicbrainz-style