Re: [mb-users] Should catalog numbers be capitalised?

On 09/21/2014 10:29 AM, Alex Mauer wrote:
> On 9/18/2014 10:38 AM, caller#6 wrote:
>> On 09/17/2014 03:48 PM, lixobix wrote:
>>> Should catalog numbers be capitalised, or should they be entered as shown?
>> Where possible, I'd prefer to use the form that the label uses in
>> printed catalogs or on web pages over the form used on an individual
>> release (assuming there's a difference).
> It seems completely wrong to me to use a source other than the release
> for this information. MB is about the releases, not about some website
> or printed catalog.

I don't think MB is fundamentally about releases. I think it's about 
showing the interrelatedness of music data.

 From earlier irc discussions (if I remember correctly), you've 
mentioned that it's interesting to see how numbering schemes and 
formatting within a label may change over time. Sure. That sounds like 
an interesting exercise.

Meanwhile, label's presumably store/present their catnos internally in a 
way that is meaningful to them. Collate-able, human scannable, 
machine-readable or whatever.

Is there a way to satisfy both concerns? Two fields, one for "as on 
cover", one for "as in catalog"? (not my preference, but wouldn't be the 
end of the world either)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think there's a way to normalize 
catnos by machine. e.g. you can't just remove all spaces and dashes. A 
dash might be a spacer, might indicate a range or a part number.