[mb-style] RFC: FeaturingArtistStyle amendment

[Chris B]

but then, they are not always displayed the same on different releases
of the same master :)
see under pressure:
b - under pressure (feat. q) -
http://www.discogs.com/viewimages?what=R&obid=238538
db & q - under pressure - http://www.discogs.com/viewimages?what=R&obid=437665
db - under pressure - http://www.discogs.com/viewimages?what=R&obid=1054835
q & db - under pressure - http://www.discogs.com/release/369899

(ok so not all will be the same master but i think it's finally the
suite of real world examples that illustrate my "context sensitive
feat.s" thing)

2008/5/15 Brian Schweitzer <brian.brianschweitzer at gmail.com>:
> The problem being, of course, that such feat's are not maintained
> consistently between releases of the same master...
>
> Brian
>
> On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 9:05 AM, Kuno Woudt <kuno at frob.nl> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 10:23:32AM +0200, Bram van Dijk wrote:
>> > I would even like the idea of removing ExtraTitleInformation from the
>> > title.
>> > Not that I expect that to happen anytime soon, or anytime at all.
>> > But the basic point is that the title field should just contain the
>> > title.
>>
>> ".. as printed on the cover".
>>
>> IMO, we shouldn't remove or add ExtraTitleInformation.  If the backcover
>> of a cd has  "love song (feat. foo)", we should NOT remove that from the
>> title.  If the backcover just has  "love song" in the tracklisting, with
>> 'foo' credited elsewhere on the release packaging, we shouldn't add that
>> to the title either -- we have ARs for that nowadays.
>>
>> -- kuno / warp.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Musicbrainz-style mailing list
>> Musicbrainz-style at lists.musicbrainz.org
>> http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Musicbrainz-style mailing list
> Musicbrainz-style at lists.musicbrainz.org
> http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
>