2012/2/9, symphonick <symphon...@gmail.com>: > 2012/2/9 monxton <musicbra...@jordan-maynard.org> > >> On 07/02/2012 20:20, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote: >> - There's lots of heated debate about Artist Credit, but we already have >> the mechanism for including that data in ARs. Some people are dismissing >> those because they are too difficult to edit. So the problem we should >> be tackling is the editor. If all this information is added to the AC, >> is that a tacit agreement that ARs are not going be used? Duplicating >> data is generally a Bad Thing. >> >> > No, a future solution should definitely be based on ARs IMO. Then we can > search for roles, for example. These suggestions is about making use of the > current UI, not about going back to pre-AR MB. Some of the limitations of > the artist fields (only one artist possible or create a new collaboration > artist) were removed in NGS, so I want to update the guidelines to reflect > this. But the artist concept just doesn't fit classical, and I'm hoping for > a solution eventually where you can enter all ARs when entering a release, > and the artist fields will get populated automatically. But we still need > to decide what data these fields should contain.
With the current UI? I really believe this would be impossible to enforce with the current UI. I agree that the best (?) system will probably imply modifications to the database schema, but I think there are intermediate steps where the UI could be modified without any schema change in order to make these rules usable. -- Frederic Da Vitoria (davitof) 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
