[mb-style] 2 releases packaged together

[Chris B]

I'm thinking of releases like:

The Black Album & Come on Feel the Dandy Warhols
http://musicbrainz.org/release/b0f2050d-62d7-43f2-aa07-208781ffa11f.html
http://musicbrainz.org/release/2a8c5a82-c084-4fd3-9272-76a8f8cb65fb.html
both packaged together in a double disc set, not available separately
(??), and neither can be considered (bonus disc) as far as i'm aware.

or
The Dream House / Dedications To Flea
http://www.discogs.com/release/536712
again packaged together, but the latter was available separately (in a
limited quantity) - http://www.discogs.com/release/486275 , but again
can't be considered (bonus disc). this example i own and it's
interesting to note that the each release's artwork occupies one side
of the CDs cover so there is no unique artwork for the set.

following the guidelines to the letter both these example would be
handled like so:
"The Dream House / Dedications To Flea (disc 1: The Dream House)" but
this seems unnecessarily redundant to me, especially as it's not
always clear what disc 1 is (and indeed, not important when both
releases are unrelated).

i suggest we allow them to have their separate titles ("The Dream
House" and "Dedications To Flea"), and wait for master release/release
event ARs to take care of the 'these releases were packaged together'
fact, rather than overload the title, much as BoxSetNameStyle is doing
with sets of releases that are available separately.

so basically i'm saying that unless a box/disc set has some kind of
title (other than "Album Name / Album Name / etc"), we should just
enter the releases separately. if there's a consensus towards this i
can RFC some kind of amendment.

chris/gecks