2006/4/5, Nathan Noble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > This would imply creating perhaps hundreds of sparsely > populated db columns, or a more sophisticated schema > with dynamic attributes. Performance has to be > considered. Not stored in specific columns. The AR system gives an example of an alternative system for storing information which is not always present. Another solution could be to create a table for the specific classical attributes. This table would be populated only when at least one of the specific attributes is input
> Also, is MB really supposed to be a music > encyclopedia? 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. The possibility for me to input it and to use it would definitely be for me a reason to stay with MB. > 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. There is a huge difference between something like wikipedia and MB: MB is a database. I don't see how you can ask Wikipedia the list of composers that were alive at a certain date. The data may be there but the wikipedia structure doesn't allow to retrieve it automatically. Now MB could do this kind of search quite easily. Actually, I believe it is already able to do so: the birth and death dates of artists are already stored in the database, and with a simple sql request the answer to the above question could be recovered. -- Frederic Da Vitoria _______________________________________________ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
