[mb-style] Defining packaging

Frederic Da Vitoria davitofrg at gmail.com
Mon Jul 4 08:03:17 UTC 2011

2011/7/4, Simon Reinhardt <simon.reinhardt at koeln.de>:
> Ryan Torchia wrote:
>> I think the list should remain as general and basic as possible.  What is
>> the functional purpose of the field?  Do we expect it to be useful in
>> distinguishing different editions or assist users in deciding whether they
>> want to buy that release?  Or are we just trying to document the package
>> type for posterity?  If we keep making the list more specific and complex,
>> users are going to be more likely to skip it, make an incorrect choice, or
>> just set it to something generic like "Jewel Case."  With all the formats
>> were supporting, a detailed list would make that pop-up kind of difficult
>> to navigate.
> I think Nikki's question was more general than just thinking about the list
> and the field we currently have. If we can come up with an alternative way
> to represent the packaging in MB then surely this can be implemented.
> "Jewel Case" is not very generic to me, btw. :-)

I think Torc was right in his method (although I may disagree in his
conclusions). Before defining what (and how) we want to store, we
should answer to the question "what for". As long as we don't clearly
define the aims, we will have fruitless discussions because we will
effectively and unknowingly be discussing different things.

Frederic Da Vitoria

Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » -

More information about the MusicBrainz-style mailing list