For me primary package is the one you carry around, the outer package, the box.
Not the various content (art book, sleeve, jewel case, etc.).
First: get rid of the term “Liner” which obviously even native speakers do not really understand (or at least not in the definition MusicBrainz is quite alone to give). Wherever that comes from it’s far from being common use. A google search for “liner” gives all kind of results – but none that approaches the one discussed here; Wikipedia uses "(inner) sleeve” for the additional protective cover (in both the german and english version, while french and spanish don’t even mention it at all https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Album_cover). “Inner sleeve” – which is self-explaining and translatable – is the term I have been using and will continue to use when uploading such an item to CAA.
Second: we need to re-discuss the exclusivity of “front“ and “back“. Not being allowed to use these terms (maybe with some additional qualifier) in case of a exact replica of the original vinyl cover is absurd. Adding the (replica) covers of the individual CDs here e.g. (https://musicbrainz.org/release/5507f622-a2f5-4cb1-9d8d-14ea2824525c/cover-art) or here (https://musicbrainz.org/release/4bebacdd-18e7-4299-b3d6-68894929e837/cover-art ) as front and back of CD 1, CD2 … DVD20 is counterintuitive and IMO wrong.
2 Likes
I do a lot of scanning and have some very different types of packages. I agree that we certainly need some more flexible types.
- MATRIX or HUB for the inner ring of the CD or Vinyl.
- Better name for the inside of a gatefold (inner?)
- A BOX and SLEEVE type. (Makes me laugh we have OBI in there for one market, but miss a wider option)
A lot of boxsets are thrown together really cheaply. So they are just five releases with a wrapper. And this does give five Fronts. (Six when you include the wrapper itself) When you pull each item out of the box you want to know which side is the front of each item. Same with wanting to know you have five mediums.
If everything became “other” we loose the advantage of a database and allowing other projects to read this data. (I’m thinking KODI and other media centres). When there are multiple fronts, then that first front is reliably the Package front that @jesus2099 wants. Same with Back - the editors are very good at putting the front\back\spines of the BOX first in the list of artwork. And then listing each separate sub-item in order after that.
Those separate items in the box should still have their front\back\spine as they have their own front\back\spines and often are listed.
When reading some of the comments above I realise that @kellnerd is very similar in his ideas to my thoughts. That is likely due to dealing with those larger Pink Floyd boxsets where our requirements are being formed.
And no - please do not remove “liner” as a type. That is perfect for current use of a thin paper or card sleeve around the medium. As is clear from its original roots with Vinyl releases.
5 Likes
This is a point I wanted to pull out. Inside a box are usually some very different and separate objects. There may be an “original album”, “live extras”, “Concert DVD”. Or multiple album releases across a number of years in a 25th anniversary box. These all have very separately defined sub-packages. And that clarity is need.
2 Likes
I don’t ask to remove the type: just replace the term by something more suitable ;). And could someone please show me where outside of MusicBrainz this “inner sleeve around the medium” is called “Liner”?
I just want to know what is the front and back of the release.
If I wanted all 5 fronts and backs, I would have bought individual releases. 
I prefer we stick to smaller amount of types, medium is already a type, I prefer not splitting our types in subdivisions.
But you can tell this now as the FIRST front is the product front.
Meanwhile when I pull the second disk out of the box, which is a DVD of a concert, then that should have its own sub-art.
This is why are at this issue today. MB is now trying to hold data for many different external uses. Most people don’t care about the HUB info and would probably de-select it in products like Picard.
1 Like
I don’t understand what’s the damage if multiple different Fronts are available as long as the first one is the outer package. And no, I don’t buy a box set because I don’t like to have separate releases, but as it’s probably a cheap offer and I like to have all the music.
It will be acceptable to have only one Front and commented “Others” instead (if it’s decided), but I agree on the opinion of @IvanDobsky, @kellnerd, @chabreyflint and others to give box sets some structure.
By the way: Many thanks for the recommended microscope
4 Likes
Maybe it is a British thing then. I’ve always known this as a word when dealing with my vinyl. Even as a kid in the 70s. I’ll go digging some research later on the word and its use.
2 Likes
Maybe this is too simplistic of a solution. What about a new “Art Type” of “Package” or any name that conveys this is within the boxset. Select art type “Package” and whatever other art types you normally select (package/front/spine/back). Use the comment to describe the art. I saw someones edit use something like following in the comment:
CD 1/5: AlbumName1, cardboard sleeve, front
CD 1/5: AlbumName1, cardboard sleeve, back
…
CD 5/5: AlbumName4, cardboard sleeve, front
CD 5/5: AlbumName5, cardboard sleeve, back
Other suggestions, thoughts?
2 Likes
I added a ticket some time ago requesting a “Gatefold” type for cover art. If anyone wants to vote on it:
7 Likes