Excellent question - this is something I have struggled with as well, as far as contributions are concerned. Locally, I always try to be consistent, so I've picked one approach and I try to stick with that. But not everyone handles this the same way, so in the online database, there are a lot of differences.

My personal approach is based on the contribution rules on running time, that say: "For branching titles, or those with multiple versions (e.g. Theatrical and Director's Cut) on the same disc, use the longest running time." Since the contribution rules explicitly favour the longer cut there, I apply that same approach to audio tracks and subtitles, and even to cast and crew. If the rules tell me to use the longer running time, then I'll also use the audio tracks and the subtitle streams from that same (longer) cut, and if the cast/crew credits aren't exactly the same, then I'll use the cast/crew from that same (longer) cut as well.

That's my approach, but other approaches I've encountered in the database include:

- to only list the "lowest common denominator", so to only enter the audio tracks/subtitles that are available on both cuts;
- to list the audio tracks/subtitles of the cut that has the most different languages;
- or to simply list all of them - though in which order is unclear.

When listing all of them, there are still several possibilities on how to format the audio tracks: some people tend to list all audio tracks for one cut first, and then all the audio tracks for the second cut (and not everyone agrees which cut should then be listed first). So if one cut has five audio tracks, and the second cut has two audio tracks, the profile ends up with seven audio tracks. While others seem to "merge" the two sets of audio tracks together, eliminating doubles.

Hello.  Thanks for your replies.  It does indeed look like one of things things that's been considered a few times but never really been resolved.

For myself, in my local database I list all the audio tracks available for either version once, T!M's "merge" variant that eliminates duplicates.  (I also do this for double packs that contain the same film on both BD and DVD, as I don't keep the DVD as an individual profile locally but like to have a record of what's on it anyway.)

If you only list the audio (and for that matter the subtitles) from the longest version, then you can end up with slightly inconsistent looking information, such as a Commentary ticked as a Feature but with no corresponding audio track. (In fact this is exactly what's happened with a contribution for "Ted" I submitted this morning that I didn't change the Audio for as it got me thinking about this).  We merge information like Features (and in fact most other things), so not to do the same for Audio (or subtitles) seems again a bit inconsistent.  I guess another alternative nowadays might be to list each version as a totally separate Alternative Version, effectively treating each as a separate film?

The more I think about this the more frustrated I get (I like things to be black and white) and I suspect it's just an example of a bigger issue in how the 'same' film is treated in the online database, whether it's different versions or the same versions on different media.  The original system based on UPC or Disc ID has generally worked well, but when we start to try to be more granular, the limitations and inconsistencies start to get in the way.

The world is full of 'lumpers' and 'splitters' and the two will never agree!