2013/1/25 jacobbrett <jacobbr...@hotmail.com> > I’ll repost what I wrote on the dev list > < > http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/Recordings-Masters-mb-dev-discussion-2012-01-23-td4647103.html > > > (as I was absent): > > jacobbrett wrote > > > http://chatlogs.musicbrainz.org/musicbrainz-devel/2013/2013-01/2013-01-23.html#T20-29-21-549097 > > > > 20:49:40 ianmcorvidae: “that merge guideline does ignore all the pre-NGS > > stuff -- I think that 10 years of data is rather more important than the > > bit since NGS release tbh” [1] > > > > I’m super‐late to the party, though what is the problem (besides dev. > time > > and increased database complexity) of implementing Master entities, if we > > default to “catch‐alls”? Also, I’m assuming Masters are not exposed in > the > > API/UI by default. I still back my prototype: > > https://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Jacobbrett/Recordings > > > > This is directed towards nikki, etc.’s proposal: One argument I have > > against relying on master relationships at release level is that a > > mastered track may appear identical on two releases (more likely > > bit‐identical on digital releases, especially), yet the masterer is not > > known for either of the two releases. Even if the masterer was known for > > those tracks on those two releases and the masterer was the same person, > > how can we represent whether the tracks are identical masters? At least, > > with Master entities, we can say definitely that those tracks on those > two > > releases are the same master (after analysing the waveforms somehow). > > > > Due to the above, if it is decided to implement Master entities, I’d > > prefer to redefine the definition of existing entities (Recordings) with > > the implementation of the former—I’m not convinced automatically moving > > masterer relationships to Release level is a good idea in all cases (or > > necessarily at all). > > > > [1] > > > http://chatlogs.musicbrainz.org/musicbrainz-devel/2013/2013-01/2013-01-23.html#T20-49-40-727731 >
I understand what you are saying, but I don't think the current situation is better. Actually, I believe the current situation is worse because the word "Recording" suggests to some editors to merge Recordings which are completely different masters/transfers (sometimes separated by 20 years). So what do you suggest? -- 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
