On 4/4/06, Nathan Noble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
i agreee this issue must be addressed. we would need input templated for various eras/genres. i don't know enough about programming to say how performance will be improved at the code level.
what else would you call it?
Grove is not a free encycloapedia, and the information is just lists, not a database.
the wiki doesn't have this info, or if it does in a few cases, it is also just lists.
when i rip a cd set of tchaikovsky works to my HD, having TAGS is supposed to get around the inherent limitations of a CD--having the works in a fixed order, etc--and is supposed to allow me to 'sort' by various criteria. some of the most natural cirteria that one would want to sort by in their classical music collection would be things like 'date composed' 'date published' 'country of composer's birth' 'number of movements' 'tempo indication' yadaydayda, and entering this data over and over again for different recordings is inefficient. thus a separate strucutre for works is requried.
once this structure is in place, it only makes sense to apply it to purposes other than just organizing your mp3s, allowing it to be browsed in itself, etc.
This would imply creating perhaps hundreds of sparsely
populated db columns, or a more sophisticated schema
with dynamic attributes. Performance has to be
considered.
i agreee this issue must be addressed. we would need input templated for various eras/genres. i don't know enough about programming to say how performance will be improved at the code level.
Also, is MB really supposed to be a music
encyclopedia?
what else would you call it?
If it were like one, how many people
would use this info? I don't know the answer to that,
but it's not what drew me here.
Last, if Grove or wiki or some other source has most
of this information, why not just add a link? Or two
or three? If nothing else, it's infinitely simpler.
-Nate
Grove is not a free encycloapedia, and the information is just lists, not a database.
the wiki doesn't have this info, or if it does in a few cases, it is also just lists.
when i rip a cd set of tchaikovsky works to my HD, having TAGS is supposed to get around the inherent limitations of a CD--having the works in a fixed order, etc--and is supposed to allow me to 'sort' by various criteria. some of the most natural cirteria that one would want to sort by in their classical music collection would be things like 'date composed' 'date published' 'country of composer's birth' 'number of movements' 'tempo indication' yadaydayda, and entering this data over and over again for different recordings is inefficient. thus a separate strucutre for works is requried.
once this structure is in place, it only makes sense to apply it to purposes other than just organizing your mp3s, allowing it to be browsed in itself, etc.
_______________________________________________ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
