On Mar 3, 2006, at 7:47 AM, Don Redman wrote:
No not a single Instrument, but I think that Mo's wholly new instrment
tree does need testing. For example it might need some "other" leaves,
but this is difficult to tell in theory.
And finally I am growing tired of all these debates about what should
be and what should not be. Testing coud help us all to move the focus
onto the question whether a solution is *vaible*, whether it works.
Here are a few thoughts on this matter:
1. Mo has an improved instrument tree, we should take a look at it as a
starting point. Let's get it loaded on the test server after this
sunday.
2. We should appoint an instrument secretary, apart from the main style
secretary, who oversees the instrument tree and makes decisions about
when/where to add new instruments.
3. I think we should enter in MOST instruments, but not all. I would
suggest using criteria like:
- If the instrument has a wikipedia entry (that is not marked for
deletion or major fixes) it should be added
- If not, the person wishing to add the instrument, should find N
references to this instrument being used on albums. I would think that
5 references might be a good starting point.
- Instruments with less than N references should simply be marked as
"other". Or perhaps "other wind", "other strings", "other percussion".
--
--ruaok Somewhere in Texas a village is *still* missing its
idiot.
Robert Kaye -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://mayhem-chaos.net
_______________________________________________
Musicbrainz-style mailing list
Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
