[mb-style] Bach passions and CSG

[Chris B]

On 21/03/2008, Frederic Da Vitoria <davitofrg at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > If you generalized this procedure, how would you enter (in the current
> > > state of the MB database)
> > >
> http://musicbrainz.org/release/86a78b3d-08d6-4b42-990b-30463b66fc98.html
> ?
> >
> > My mail concerned Bach passions. It is not so common to mention the BWVs
> > for them (and I know I have Händel oratorios which do not mention the
> > HWVs - I recently checked some - yet this is *never* a problem).
>
> Well, you know that this is contrary to the CSG?

the un-agreed on CSG!

i totally don't get why we're still having the conversations about
adding these cat#s and duplicating work titles in track titles when
both worklists and track merges are just around the corner. i feel
blessed that my collection of classical music is meagre enough that i
can tag it all myself and not have to use MBz!

i agree with the scenario Brian said about using these mega-rules for
the worklist, and trying to think what is acceptable for the 'release'
CSG. whatever the latter ends up being, it surely won't include either
cat#s or duplicate work titles!