[mb-style] Bach passions and CSG

[Frederic Da Vitoria]

On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 2:20 PM, Chris B <chris at whenironsattack.com> wrote:

> 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!
>

Right. Forget everything I just said :-D

-- 
Frederic Da Vitoria
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/attachments/20080321/ff4919c3/attachment.htm