So what needs to be done to get works off the ground? I can't offer programming skills at this point, but I'd love to help with any of the (thorny) design issues..
2009/1/6 Paul C. Bryan <em...@pbryan.net> > +1 > > I'm convinced, especially if different track titles could be represented > with release events. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Frederic Da Vitoria <davito...@gmail.com> > Reply-to: MusicBrainz style discussion > <musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org> > To: MusicBrainz style discussion > <musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org> > Subject: Re: [mb-style] The return of [clean up CSG]??? (was: Re: CSG > issues (was: 'Piano Sonata / Concerto' vs. 'Sonata / Concerto for > Piano)) > Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 19:41:05 +0100 > > I can understand the longing, I had the same idea before. But there are > practical issues: the first one which comes to my mind is language. I > can read Mozart's or Beethoven's work titles in German, but certainly > not Tchaikovsky's or Prokofiev's. So we will have to enable some sort of > translation. The representation selection issue can be solved, after all > Picard already has an option to "translate" artist names, why not work > titles? > > My way of representing things allows to separate what is in the track > from how it is named. I agree it does not solve every issue. Of course > the many ways a work is titled is a problem. But at least I allow for > representing one of them, while normalising would completely erase this > piece of information. If users feel this is important enough, one day MB > might offer to enter different track titles for each event. I would not > enter them, as I feel the data provided by a work AR would provide all > the information I'd ever want, but if some users want to take the pains > to enter them, why not? > > 2009/1/6 Paul C. Bryan <em...@pbryan.net> > Good points, Frederic. > > I definitely like the part about of having localization of track > titles > for various languages. > > Though it would still beg the question, once works exist in MB: > what > *should* be the primary representation of a track title in MB? > I'm not > sure it should be whatever was printed on the cover -- for > example, > there can be multiple releases with variations. > > Also, a challenge to that approach would be how to provide the > ability > to select the representation of a track title you would want. I > expect > most applications that will query MB will simply query for a > track > title. > > I guess since I've seen so many variations of titles in MB for > the same > work, including numerous covers of jazz standards, each with > variations > of titles, and compilations of the very same albums with > variations > again of the titles, I long for some kind of canonicalization in > track > titles. It's just a longing though; it's not a strong conviction > (yet ;) > > Paul > > -----Original Message----- > From: Frederic Da Vitoria <davito...@gmail.com> > Reply-to: MusicBrainz style discussion > <musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org> > To: MusicBrainz style discussion > <musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org> > > Subject: Re: [mb-style] The return of [clean up CSG]??? (was: > Re: CSG > issues (was: 'Piano Sonata / Concerto' vs. 'Sonata / Concerto > for > Piano)) > > > Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 19:01:14 +0100 > > 2009/1/6 Paul C. Bryan <em...@pbryan.net> > I believe the motivation for any current CSG work is to > ensure > that when > titles are added, they're added in a canonical form, > based on a > set of > rules, with plenty of exceptions. I think WORKs have the > potential to > change all of that, allowing canonical information to be > applied > to the > work. > > I think works would represent a major improvement, namely > because we'd > be in a position to derive track titles from canonical > work > titles -- we > could even automagically enforce track title conformance > to > canonical > work titles for classical if we chose, or at least flag > existing > titles > as non-conformant. > > With works, I'd project that CSG would shift focus from > "what > are the > guidelines for editors to use when editing the track > titles of > releases" > to "what are the guidelines for editors to use when > editing the > canonical titles of particular works?" > > So I guess my question would be, what is the reasonable > timeline > for > works to show up in MB? If months (not years) then I'm > dubious > of > putting a lot of effort into something that would > represent a > stop-gap > until works arrive. If the timeframe is > 1 year, then I > think > we should > look at improving the guidelines. > > Regardless of the works timeframe, I would say that there > is > value in > establishing canonical information for works, even if > they go > into > CSGStandard/ComposerName, to guide those who are > currently > trying to > navigate the classical style minefield without a map. > > > I slightly disagree: I think that WORKs will remove the need for > the > most of the styles. Let me explain: > if WORKs are implemented, each track of each release will be ARd > to the > correct WORK. Which means that any representation which the > end-user may > wish to obtain can be derived form WORK data (and of course from > the > other ARs such as performers). There would be no need for a > canonical > form anymore. Editors could simply enter the track names as they > are > printed on the sleeve. If some end-users want to see what was on > the > sleeve, no problem, it was entered. If others want to see a > canonical > form, it can be extrated from the WORK. Users who want the full > catalogue numbers could have them, but those who don't want them > could > avoid them. Track titles could even be translated, so that even > if I buy > a russian or japanese release, I could tag it in French :-) > > > > > -- > Frederic Da Vitoria > > Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » - > http://www.april.org > > _______________________________________________ > Musicbrainz-style mailing list > Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org > http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style > > > _______________________________________________ > Musicbrainz-style mailing list > Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org > http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style >
_______________________________________________ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
