Re: [mb-users] Releases with incorrect barcodes on the physical medium

jacobbrett <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.audio.musicbrainz.user
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Kuno Woudt wrote
> Hello,
> 
> On 09/25/2012 05:43 PM, caller#6 wrote:
>> If that's the prevailing wisdom, I won't fight it but it doesn't make
>> sense to me.
>>
>> To me, the barcode is a functional thing. If it doesn't actually
>> identify a product in the marketplace, why enter it? I have to believe
>> that for cases like this that are obviously printing/clerical errors of
>> some kind, the problem was fixed with a sticker or something. Retailers
>> had to keep track of inventory didn't they?
> 
> I expect one of the uses of barcodes is for a musicbrainz user to 
> perform a lookup of data in the database by scanning whatever barcode is 
> printed on the physical release they have.  Which to me means that if a 
> barcode appears on a physical release, I should be allowed to enter it 
> in a machine readable field in musicbrainz when I enter that release.
> 
> -- kuno / warp.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> MusicBrainz-users mailing list

> [email protected]

> http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users

The problem is that online retailers may get hold of the correct barcode, so
we have two barcodes in the wild attributed to one release. Perhaps the
obvious solution is to support multiple barcodes for a release, though with
a flag to specify if it's technically incorrect?



--
View this message in context: http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/Releases-with-incorrect-barcodes-on-the-physical-medium-tp4642170p4643007.html
Sent from the MusicBrainz - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.