"feat." marker

Total Posts
Topic Starter
Any form of `feat.`, `ft.`, `Ft.`, etc. must be written as `feat.` when it is used as a marker signifying an artist featured in the song.

consensus of beatmapsets/1294825/discussion/-/generalAll#/1978090 seems to be that the artist/title's all caps stylization would make "FEAT." more appropriate than "feat.", while the rc says otherwise

what do you think? should the rc be changed to accomodate for this?
i was always under the impression that these werent case sensitive if stylization called for otherwise, guess i didnt read that it listed "ft." and "Ft." separately though.

i think its perfectly acceptable to allow any capitalization of "feat." if an official source lists it as "FEAT." "Feat." ect, though it should always been defaulted to "feat." if no official source has the same spelling
Een Persoon
agree with radar
Nao Tomori
what radar said

can also be extrapolated if the official source use "Feat" or "FEAT" without the period that you can probably also use "Feat." and "FEAT." in those instances

If the official sources uses FT. (the blood code map didn't do this but say it did for example) you should also be allowed to use FEAT. in that instance if the rest of the song title is also all caps to match it aesthetically.

can also see something like "Artist - Song Title FT. Artist2" being stylized as "Artist - Song Title Feat. Artist2" but idk how far we're gonna take this lol

all of this is basically common sense
I share the same thoughts as hobbes, so recursively i also share the same thoughts as radar !

Overall, I would either want to see FEAT. or feat. in the artist name, after that we should use common sense as to which one should be used in every singular case (be it aesthetic case mathching, FT. -> FEAT. etc etc.)
What about the case when the song title is written in 1337, for example, "s0M3 C00L T!t13 F7. 5OmE c0013R aR7!5T"?
Een Persoon
also i think itd be cool to extend this to other markers like (cut ver.), (sped up ver.) and whatnot
Please sign in to reply.

New reply