This probably should be in a separate thread, but since I'm still fleshing out the details:
In regard to the two comments above, the upcoming changes to the tracklist system will attempt to address the issues raised.
First is the distinction between "official" and "unofficial" tracknames; visitors ought to be able to visually identify names taken from official sources such as album booklets and sound tests, and distinguish them from fan-submitted translations. Also, the "source" of the tracknames needs to be recorded.
Second is the distinction between "default" and "corrected" tracknames; these are for confirmed misprints where a title was erroneously substituted for another (official) title, or even transposing entire sections of the original tracklist.
With this scheme, the concept of "tracklists" is no longer wholesale substitution of the default tracklist, but simply a collection of "titles" (default or corrected) which can have any number of "translations" (official or unofficial). Tracklists can then be displayed by overlaying the default (i.e. the exact titles printed on the album) with corrections and translations depending on the user selected options.
This also means that users can submit an arbitrary number of translations for an arbitrary number of tracks on any album (or rather, piece of media), so there'd need to be some sort of priority or ranking mechanism. Community votes, perhaps.
And since "titles" are now separated from "tracks", users can optionally choose to use the same title entry on identical tracks, ensuring that the translations are consistent. (Although this should be used sparingly on identically-named tracks with different contexts).
What do you think?
|