[mb-users] Some release attributes shouldn't be affected by data quality

[Frederic Da Vitoria]

2007/7/2, Jugdish <jugdizh at gmail.com>:
>
> Recently I've been going through my CD collection and entering in
> every possible liner note I can as an AR (adding the remaining credits
> to the annotation) thereby making the releases essentially "complete".
> I'd really like to be locking these releases down by changing the data
> quality to "high" but I find myself quite hesitant to do so. The
> problem is that there are certain aspects of releases that can never
> be 100% final, such as release events (could be re-issued at some
> future date) and certain types of ARs (like "is a cover of", "is a
> remix of", etc). I feel like I'd just be shooting myself in the foot
> if I change any release to high quality because sometime down the road
> someone (probably me) will come back to the release with some new info
> to add and if it's for an artist with practically no subscribed
> editors, they'll have to go try to recruit votes from people just to
> get their edits in.
>
> So what I propose is that certain aspects of releases *not* be
> affected by the release quality, namely anything that could
> conceivably be added in the future. I think the data quality system
> would be utilized a lot more (certainly by me!) as a result.
>

What about saying that Data Quality affects Modify and Delete edits but not
Add edits? This is just an idea, I probably missed some implications, but it
should be rather easy to implement, and quite easy to understand for users.

-- 
Frederic Da Vitoria
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-users/attachments/20070702/a81758e8/attachment.htm