Yin Izanami wrote:
>
> I have major objections to recent comments.
>
>>jacobbrett wrote:
>> In my opinion:
>>
>> Track/Release Titles:
>> * Typographical errors
>> * Incorrect titles (e.g. bootleg prints title as a line from the
> lyrics,
>> or two track titles are swapped)
>> * Poor capitalisation (ALL-CAPS, all-lowercase etc., barring Artist
>> Intent or Japanese/foreign exception)
>> * Subtitle (Japanese/foreign exception)
>> * Series/Volume/Part numbers (Japanese/foreign exception)
>> * Extra title information:
>> * "Song Name remix name" → "Song Name (remix name)"
>> * "Song Name 〜remix name〜" → no change (Japanese/foreign exception)
>> * Some abbreviations:
>> * "w/" → "with"
>> * "ft." → "feat."
>>
>> If any affected features "as printed" are important for identifying a
>> particular release, a note can be made in the release annotation.
>>
>
> I don't understand your post. Are all those things that you would _fix_?
> Because if you're going to go that far, how exactly will Tracklist Titles
> and Tracklist Artist Credits differ from Recording Titles and Recording
> Artist
> Credits?
>
They are things I suggest should be normalised.
Tracklist Titles/Artist Credits would be as printed, plus the above
suggestions, whereas Recording Titles/Artist Credits would be the
"canonical" (which could be defined via COD, or similar principle) name.
> If you're going to make Tracks and Recordings nearly identical, then as I
> understand it, you defeat the purpose of NGS splitting tracks (in a
> tracklist) from Recordings. Without the permission for track and
> recording
> fields to differ, the only thing left would be to give editors headaches
> synchronizing 2 titles, 2 artist credits, and 2 track lengths between each
> other. (This is already a major pain for releases added without track
> lengths. Times filled in for the release's tracklist won't be reflected
> in
> the recordings, they need to be done separately. Why require the extra
> work
> if in fact Tracks and Recordings should both be normalized to similar or
> identical values?)
>
Well, the Tracklist Titles/AC and Recording Titles/AC wouldn't necessarily
be identical, and in many cases actually wouldn't.
For example:
Recording "Bullet in the Head (Sir Jinx remix)" [1] has associated tracks:
* Bullet in the Head (remix) [×6]
* Bullet in the Head (Sir Jinx remix) [×4]
* Bullet in the Head (Sir Jinx mix) [×1]
[1] http://musicbrainz.org/recording/4ee32a20-716d-4e55-930c-17ccbb198b38
>>jacobbrett wrote:
>> I think the above rules would sufficiently retain the titling as intended
> on
>> a particular release, while making it more useful/less erroneous and
>> standardised. The recording title could take the above further by having
>> further normalisation applied ("with" → "feat."? Perhaps a better example
> is
>> needed here...),
>
> So you want to normalize "A with B" to "A feat. B"? Will you stop there,
> or
> will you also change "A starring B", "A & B", "AxB", "A-B", "A+B", "AとB"
> (that's a Japanese character if you get a question mark), "A Lovers B", or
> whatever other combining word the artists came up with, to also be "A
> feat.
> B"? If you're not willing to convert every language and every word to
> "feat.", then what makes "with" synonymous with "featuring" in a way that
> other phrases aren't?
>
Well, most of those look like equal collaborations, so I wouldn't touch
them.
As I pointed out, perhaps "with" → "feat." isn't a good example of
"further/miscellaneous normalisation", as there may be a semantic
difference. I'm open to suggestions for better examples of what it could
include. Perhaps nothing, even.
>>>Andii Hughes wrote:
>>>The recording title should be the most complete possible title (i.e.
>>>with all feat. attributions, etc.) and normalised (e.g. with->feat as
>>>you say).
>
> I thought there was widespread agreement that Recording titles should NOT
> contain artists, and that featured artists should be moved into Recording
> artist credits.
>
I'm not sure a definite decision has been made at this time.
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 8:09 PM, Andii Hughes
> <gnu_and...@member.fsf.org>wrote:
>
>> On 12 June 2011 12:11, jacobbrett <jacobbr...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> snip...
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
--
View this message in context:
http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/Normalization-of-release-level-data-NGS-tp3591563p3598370.html
Sent from the Musicbrainz - Style mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
