On 28 Feb 2014 19:02, "SwissChris" <swissch...@gmail.com> wrote: > > - 1 > > I have always, like most editors here and like the guys at http://www.secondhandsongs.com , read "translated" as saying "(more or less faithfully) transferred into another language"
Makes sense to me - you can't expect translations to be perfect as there often isn't a one to one mapping between languages and anyway, lyrics are likely to be tweaked to scan/rhyme >or even just "uses the same music with lyrics in a different language", since for most languages I wouldn't be able to tell how faithful a translation/adaptation is. Hmm, whether we individual editors are capable of knowing whether there's any similarity between the two versions, I think that should be what we're claiming if we use the term translation - it is what it means! >And since the UI will certainly not systematically show the work language in every context this information is obviously not bogus and definitely not useless. I think Jesus's point is not that the information itself is bogus or useless but the specific relationship is because that information can be derived from elsewhere (as long as they're related and we just mean same melody different language). So regardless of what the UI currently shows or what our relationships are currently capable of it could be automated, which would be good database design
_______________________________________________ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
