[mb-style] second RFC: add “slipcase” to packaging types
badnewsbnw at gmail.com
Tue Jul 5 22:11:36 UTC 2011
I like this criteria of selection.
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 12:00 AM, Alex Mauer <hawke at hawkesnest.net> wrote:
> On 07/05/2011 04:35 PM, Simon Reinhardt wrote:
>>> So if a release has two different packaging types, it should be placed
>>> in neither of them? That doesn’t make much sense to me.
>> *shrug* Neither does this innermost rule to me. :-)
> It’s really very very simple: put the release in the packaging that
> holds it.
> As mentioned previously on the list, we have the cassette single with a
> 4-sided slip case. 1 Medium, 1 packaging type, very simple.
> This release, 4 jewel cases inside a 5-sided slipcase. Since the
> mediums are each in a different jewel case, it’s not correct to say that
> the entire release is in a jewel case, so we need to look at the
> packaging that covers the entire release: a slipcase.
> This release, 1 jewel case (on right, liner notes bottom middle)
> inside a slipcase (top left). 1 medium, 2 packaging types. Since the
> jewel case is the innermost and holds the one medium, use that. If at
> some point MB gains multiple packaging types per release, we can use
> both types.
>> No, I meant criteria for adding new types of packaging.
> Oh, OK. I’m pretty sure we have the RFC/RFV system for that.
> —Alex Mauer “hawke”
> 1. http://991.com/Buy/ProductInformation.aspx?StockNumber=140284
> 2. http://img.mercadolivre.com.br/jm/img?s=MLB&f=168653329_6493.jpg&v=E
> MusicBrainz-style mailing list
> MusicBrainz-style at lists.musicbrainz.org
More information about the MusicBrainz-style