Lemire, Sebastien-2 wrote: > > This proposal is exactly what I've beens suggesting on MB this style list. > It is imperative that we allow child(sub-works) to be able to inherit data > from the parent(supra-work) in order to simplify and accelerate the > works-based data..... > +1 for me >
Thank you for your support! Lemire, Sebastien-2 wrote: > > I would recommend as I did in my other thread to be explicitly clear that > a > child-item *should not* have any AR that is duplicated in the > [parent]-work. > This would mean that as soon as this proposal passes RFV, we can proceed > to > start removing redundant composer ARs from child-works if they are already > present in the parent-work. > That's a very good point. I will add a mention of that to my Partial Works Relationship Inheritance page. I actually think that a note about this this should also get added to the description page for each Relationship Type involving works. I'd expect an editor to read those pages rather than Partial Works Relationship Inheritance. However, I'm going to leave that proposal to a separate RFC. -- View this message in context: http://musicbrainz-mailing-lists.2986109.n2.nabble.com/RFC-339-Partial-Works-Relationship-Inheritance-tp6939661p6942649.html Sent from the Style discussions mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
