What fascinates me is that all these different versions of everything are never bl**dy NAMED as such.
We are (and in fact have been since the beginning of time!) working on a full and definitive INDEX of all John's songs and versions thereof, which links to a DISCOGRAPHY etc...
A nagging 'challenge' is the way to title certain versions or releases that are NOT the same as each other but have NO SUFFIX or INFO IN BRACKETS to differentiate them.
This 'single edit' of 1983's Endlessly is a good example. It was never released with the words (single edit) in brackets, so should they be added to the title in an index situation?
If so, how do we differentiate between our own addition of suffixes for cataloguing purposes and those 'officially' presented in the track title...? Square brackets? Italics??
Apply this logic to albums like 'Impossible' and you'll see some of the fiddly bits that upset any logical process we try to come up with.
I've gotta be honest, but I've never really liked the look of italics (or emboldened text) - especially on a web-page. Perhaps notes in square brackets is the answer.
Also, the running times which are (sometimes) quoted aren't always that accurate. Moreover, the running time (as indicated when a CD is read) is also not a true reflection as to a tracks length - as it'll depend on how much space is left at either end of the track, and that will change according to how it was mastered.
But then such is the wonder and continually exciting challenge of trying to categorise or classify John Foxx.
But that's also what makes it so much fun - there's a real sense of achievement when new items get discovered and included in the mix, as it all means that putting a definitive overview on-line is getting closer to becoming a reality.
Anyone have a successful, lasting technique for nailing jelly to a tree..?
Or for juggling soot, or herding buttered cats...
Rob
