[mb-style] Composition/Performer/Production ARs at Release or Track level? - PROPOSAL

[Chris B]

On 02/01/2008, Barry Platt <bplatt at incoherent.net> wrote:
> Olivier <viapanda at gmail.com> wrote :
>
> > Viewpoint 3:
> > An AR on the release level has an entirely different meaning of the
> > same AR applied at track level.
> > Producer A produced the recording sessions that gave track A, B & C
> > (using the links on the tracks)
> > Producer B produced the reissue *release* containing A, B & C.
> >
> > Heriting/propagating either way (from track to release, or from
> > release to tracks) in such a case just sounds bad to me, as they
> > really mean two different things.
>
> You're right that the "Produced" AR is a potentially problematic one as
> there is a semantic difference between production of a release and
> production of a track master.  Part of me even wonders whether these
> should actually be separate ARs (or variants).

some 6 months ago i posted about a similar thing:
http://www.nabble.com/RFC%3A-Reissue-Produced-By%22-and-%22Compilation-Produced-By-to10347230s2885.html#a10347230

still needs sorting if anyone has any ideas :)