On 06/26/2012 09:41 PM, ListMyCDs.com wrote: > With a generic type I would need to use the same type for "Jurassic > Park" musical, film and video game. There's many cases where we got TV > shows, movies, Broadway shows and video games sharing the same name. > Same composer might have composed different type of scores sharing the > same name. More detailed and accurate naming of types helps identifying > and finding the right work.
That’s why we have disambiguation comments. > "Spider-Man" could be music composed for film, tv-series, Broadway show, > play or video game. I see no reason why these should all use the same > work type. More accurate information about types shouldn't need to be > stored to disambiguations or annotiations, if there's something called a > work type. But it’s the same type of work — it’s a score. The thing it’s a score *for* is an attribute of that thing, not an attribute of the work. We could make new work types “video game” “film”, “TV show” and add a work-work AR “score for”. That would be an appropriate way to handle this, I think, if starting to get somewhat outside the scope of MB itself. _______________________________________________ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
