On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:23 AM, symphonick <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > 2011/11/2 Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren <[email protected]> > > >> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 10:30 AM, symphonick <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> > Can you use the proposals we started working with a year ago? >>> > >>> > >>> http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Proposal:Conductor_Position_Relationship_Type_Proposal >>> >> Hmm, while I can see why someone might want all the detail, I wonder >> whether it isn't a little bit too much and maybe keeping it to just >> conductor or at most to "assistant", "principal" and maybe "guest" is >> enough? As I said though, I am not an expert on the matter, it's mostly >> that I feel there's a space to fill here but that this is a bit of overkill. >> >> Yeah. I haven't seen a tuba conductor position ("instrument") & maybe > it's better use assistant for both associate & assistant to avoid > confusion. > I guess that's there more for cases like "conducted strings" and the like... Although while I've certainly seen "conducted strings", I don't know if "strings conductor" is usually considered a position on its own... (I also haven't seen "emeritus" but I guess I just didn't look long enough?) > /symphonick > > _______________________________________________ > MusicBrainz-style mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style > -- Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
_______________________________________________ MusicBrainz-style mailing list [email protected] http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
