Discussion:
[mb-style] RFC: [none] for no catalog number
(too old to reply)
Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
2011-06-06 18:32:04 UTC
Permalink
Using [none] in the catalog number field would allow us to mark the
difference between "this has no cat#, and I know that" and "I don't
know if this has a cat#".

The updated page would be (only change is the "Catalog number" section):
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Reosarevok/Release
--
Nicol?s Tamargo de Eguren
Frederic Da Vitoria
2011-06-06 19:29:06 UTC
Permalink
2011/6/6 Nicol?s Tamargo de Eguren <reosarevok at gmail.com>
Post by Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
Using [none] in the catalog number field would allow us to mark the
difference between "this has no cat#, and I know that" and "I don't
know if this has a cat#".
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Reosarevok/Release
+1
--
Frederic Da Vitoria
(davitof)

Membre de l'April - ? promouvoir et d?fendre le logiciel libre ? -
http://www.april.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/attachments/20110606/84b20eb9/attachment.htm
jacobbrett
2011-06-07 11:53:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
Using [none] in the catalog number field would allow us to mark the
difference between "this has no cat#, and I know that" and "I don't
know if this has a cat#".
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Reosarevok/Release
--
Nicol?s Tamargo de Eguren
_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style at lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
+1, though I think it should be a Boolean option and not entered as text, as
the latter would be data redundancy.

--
View this message in context: http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/RFC-none-for-no-catalog-number-tp3577668p3579348.html
Sent from the Musicbrainz - Style mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
2011-06-07 11:56:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by jacobbrett
Post by Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
Using [none] in the catalog number field would allow us to mark the
difference between "this has no cat#, and I know that" and "I don't
know if this has a cat#".
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Reosarevok/Release
--
Nicol?s Tamargo de Eguren
_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style at lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
+1, though I think it should be a Boolean option and not entered as text, as
the latter would be data redundancy.
Please explain. I don't see how it would be more redundant than an
actual cat#, but I don't oppose a checkbox for it either? it's just
that I don't see where that'd fit in the RE structure (not a lot of
space there)
Post by jacobbrett
--
View this message in context: http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/RFC-none-for-no-catalog-number-tp3577668p3579348.html
Sent from the Musicbrainz - Style mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style at lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
--
Nicol?s Tamargo de Eguren
jacobbrett
2011-06-07 12:04:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
Post by jacobbrett
Post by Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
Using [none] in the catalog number field would allow us to mark the
difference between "this has no cat#, and I know that" and "I don't
know if this has a cat#".
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Reosarevok/Release
--
Nicol?s Tamargo de Eguren
_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style at lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
+1, though I think it should be a Boolean option and not entered as text, as
the latter would be data redundancy.
Please explain. I don't see how it would be more redundant than an
actual cat#, but I don't oppose a checkbox for it either? it's just
that I don't see where that'd fit in the RE structure (not a lot of
space there)
Post by jacobbrett
--
http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/RFC-none-for-no-catalog-number-tp3577668p3579348.html
Sent from the Musicbrainz - Style mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style at lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
--
Nicol?s Tamargo de Eguren
_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style at lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
The redundancy is storing the six characters of text "[none]" over and over,
compared to a 1 or 0. The latter also avoids typos.

--
View this message in context: http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/RFC-none-for-no-catalog-number-tp3577668p3579370.html
Sent from the Musicbrainz - Style mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Lukáš Lalinský
2011-06-07 12:36:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by jacobbrett
The redundancy is storing the six characters of text "[none]" over and over,
compared to a 1 or 0. The latter also avoids typos.
A big disadvantage is that the boolean field can't be added any time
soon. MB has a history of adding hacks quickly and then eventually
migrating them. :)

Lukas
Nikki
2011-06-14 06:42:04 UTC
Permalink
It's been more than a week, you can send an RFV now.

Nikki
Post by Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
Using [none] in the catalog number field would allow us to mark the
difference between "this has no cat#, and I know that" and "I don't
know if this has a cat#".
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Reosarevok/Release
Loading...