I didn't say I'm "only interested in the later". But it is definitely where my primary concern is, as you can relatively easily convert from various "feat." variations back to "feat." (e.g., doing
s/f(ea)?t(\.|uring)?/feat\./, using the regular expression from the first post), but it is impossible to have a computer turn the "feat." into whatever is actually written on the cover. (It could theoretically done by scanning uploaded cover art, but then it might have to decide between two different versions, e.g. between "ft." or "featuring", or it might read it as "tf" (
t are some of the harder ones for computers to tell apart), or a range of other issues. And we'd have to have the cover art, in a good resolution and quality, first too.)
So before 2006?
Anyway. Any points you may have stated in the past are irrelevant if they're not brought up now. You and I may have been around for years, but new members of the community have just as much to say about this, and they should not be expected to memorise arguments they have never even seen.
I did do some looking around though, and managed to finally dig this up from one of the previous times this was discussed (which includes some of your earlier arguments, AFAICT, not sure if it was all you referred to—if not, please do see if you can find them!):
[Feedback wanted!] Why do we expand abbreviations? (Page 1)
[Feedback wanted!] Why do we expand abbreviations? (Page 2)