> > > Let's see if we can't try to get this thing done and closed by the end > > > of March, and not end up dragging it on and on, or dropping it in > > > disgust this time? Passing a clean CSG gets rid of the "special > > > knowledge of the classical editors" , it clears a mass of lousy docs > > > and outstanding issues out of the way, and I know there's at least a > > > few editors who've stopped fixing anything, working on CSGS lists, or > > > even adding classical until we actually have this passed... let's get > > > it done. > > > > > > > > > Now my time is limited, and I'd be surprised that goes only for me, so > > please don't rush it and say "let's do it within a month". > > > > Let's cool this thing off and have a sensible discussion on small parts > > at a time, Ok? > > > > Agreed. Jumping back into mb-style has been kind of a big deal for me, but I > do want to contribute and I think that small steps are the way to go. > > Brian, could we take your doc one section at a time? Maybe a "OK, here's > what the CSG says now and here's what my working draft says. Let's discuss > this section only." > > The past few weeks' discussion that I've tried to go back to is pretty much > a big RFC for all of CSG, so that's apparently not getting us anywhere. :) > > I think Olivier kicked us off by critiquing the "What is CSG?" section > above. I have to agree with him.
Sure - however we'd like to do it. As I say, that's just something I drafted together - it still has holes; this I know. I've not touched it, really, since Aaron's release artist proposal went out. At that time, many of these issues, like the what is a unique classical release, etc, were much further from resolution than I think they now are. Please, feel free to edit/add/fill-in/flesh-out/whatever. If something seems pedantic or whatever, I'm all for seeing alternate ideas on how we can say it; let's toss them out. As I'd said when I first linked to that, the only thing I'd like to avoid is it turning from proto-doc into a discussion board, as has happened at the current CSG pages. As Oliver pointed out, CSGTS is particularly bad in this respect. Regarding timelines, sure - however long we need. But perhaps we can try to focus on getting this done, whether it's in the next month or the next 6. :) To be honest, it seems to me that these past three weeks, we kind of drifted into long debates which really never had much to do with any actual doc or guideline, and in regards to CSG, didn't really accomplish much. If we let ourselves go that route, we'll never get this done, and the 400k so far of emails will just be more "debating until we gave up". :D Regarding re-write versus revise, I did take the original as a basis - it's clear most in the style used for the structure examples. However, as also has been said, it's literally unreadable now. It does need a total revamp. So I'd propose this: We try for not one, but two final documents. One would be the "full CSG", with all the cat-corners, etc, covered, as the "full and complete CSG" - so when you have those obscure areas, you have somewhere to go that tells those nitty-gritty details. Something similar to what I've got in the sandbox now. Something to make the die-hard classical editors, who do frequently run into this cat-corner stuff, happy. The second, though, would be the "Short-form CSG" that Oliver suggests, something only 1 to 2 pages long covering the very basics of CSG that cover 80-90% of cases, just giving the basic "here's how to title most things you run into" to a non-die-hard classical editor. The long form can go into all the details on where each little bit goes, the short form just says "here's the structure (without going into the cat-corners) and here's some examples". That sound reasonable? Anyhow, I've copied the first bit of the long doc over to http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/BrianFreud/sandboxCSG Tear it apart, revise it, rewrite it if you don't like it, fill it in, flesh it out, whatever. Let's see if we can't turn that into something everyone can live with, and make a short and long version of just the first part. Once we're happy with it, we can move it into two separate docs and move on to the next part, until we're done. Sound reasonable? :) (By the way, I hope noone objects to my putting these under brianfreud/ in the wiki - I'm just trying to keep them clear from anywhere non "personal section" at the moment, so they can't be mistaken for anything other than drafts/work-in-progress by anyone actually looking for the current CSG). Hre's what I've put in the draft part for the moment: = The Classical Style Guidelines = '''Introduction to CSG''' i. [#whatiscsg What is CSG?] i. [#whatiscsgnote What is CSG not?] i. [#therecanbeonlyone Is there one particular CSG?] i. [#whoisclassical Who is considered a "classical" composer?] i. [#CSGnotapplicable In what circumstances ought CSG to not be used?] i. [#CSGhistory The History of CSG] '''The Guidelines''' 1. [#whoisclassical Who is considered a "classical" composer?] 1. [#CSGdistinctrelease What constitutes a distinct classical release?] I. [#CSGboxsets What about box sets?] 1. [#CSGreleaseartist Who is the artist for a classical work?] Brian _______________________________________________ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
