On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 10:21 AM, Jim DeLaHunt <from.nab...@jdlh.com> wrote: > > Simon Reinhardt wrote >> >> In the instrument tree I would like some of the generic terms changed to >> the way they are mostly credited on releases: >> >> - percussion instruments -> percussion >> - string instruments -> strings >> > > Those generic terms have two interpretations: as the label for a category of > more detailed instrument names, and as a non-specific term to use in > performance Relationships. > > Should these terms be used in performance Relationships at all, or should > they only be labels for a category? And in fact, how often are they used in > performance Relationships? > > The present wording sounds fine to me if they are labels for a category. The > proposed wording sounds like an improvement only for using them in > performance Relationships.
Both Percussion and Strings are fairly common credits in releases I've seen - especially percussion. So yeah, I definitely use them in relationships (as anything else would mean guessing) > > -- > View this message in context: > http://musicbrainz-mailing-lists.2986109.n2.nabble.com/RFC-Percussion-and-string-instruments-tp7095474p7096408.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 -- Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren _______________________________________________ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
