Thanks for the example - now I can see how it shows up in the track list of a release I can see why it's problematic. I hadn't thought of it as 'lying' because I hadn't seen this behaviour. It wouldn't be unreasonable to point out that a specific recording has liner notes written about it, but obviously we'd want to know where. It's almost a recording to release relationship but don't worry, I'm not proposing that. +1
On 22 April 2013 13:38, Brant Gibbard <bgibb...@ca.inter.net> wrote: > ** > This is the release I stumbled on last night: > http://musicbrainz.org/release/c54a7f7c-f196-4cff-9224-196f6eac9651 > It was originally added back in 2008, when we had tracks rather than > recordings. Back then I can see why someone would have done that, as the > notes appear to be grouped by composer and/or work. In each case one of the > people writing a note is a known specialist on the composer of the > particular piece. (Unfortunately I accidentally added more of my own by > mistake when splitting an MB artist named Michael Talbot into two artists > as the Vivaldi/Albinoni specializing musicologist had been conflated with > another person of that name who plays and writes popular music before I > noticed that they were on tracks rather than the release. I have since gone > in and started the process of deleting my own mistaken additions and moving > them to the release along with the original ones) > > > Brant Gibbard > Toronto, ON > http://bgibbard.ca > > > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* musicbrainz-style-boun...@lists.musicbrainz.org [mailto: > musicbrainz-style-boun...@lists.musicbrainz.org] *On Behalf Of *Tom > Crocker > *Sent:* April-22-13 8:23 AM > *To:* MusicBrainz Style Discussion > *Subject:* Re: [mb-style] STYLE-214: Remove Liner Notes relationship > fromrecordings > > Can we see some examples? All I can think of would be when an artist > writes the story behind the song, but don't know how it's been used > (although 'not much' seems to be the answer!) > I agree that ideally it wouldn't be on a recording, but it might make > sense to have it for a track and since we can't do that yet it might be > best to leave it there for the moment? > I also agree we need to tackle various other relationships that should > probably go. > > > On 22 April 2013 13:02, LordSputnik <ben.s...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Absolutely. As you said, it doesn't even make sense on recordings. >> >> There are also a few other misc. relationships on recordings that might >> not >> make sense (photography, illustration, provided legal representation for, >> published), which could do with sorting out. >> >> We'll also need to deprecate/kill a few relationship types on recording >> when >> the new definition comes in (eg. remaster, mastered by). >> >> For deleting this specific relationship, +1, but it would be good if we >> could deal with the other misc. relationships at the same time. >> >> >> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/STYLE-214-Remove-Liner-Notes-relationship-from-recordings-tp4651944p4651948.html >> Sent from the MusicBrainz - Style mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> MusicBrainz-style mailing list >> MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org >> http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style >> > > > _______________________________________________ > MusicBrainz-style mailing list > MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org > http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style >
_______________________________________________ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
