Re: [mb-style] Preferred lyrics for Has Lyrics At Relationship Type (community editable vs. Gracenote)
2010/3/3 Brian Schweitzer brian.brianschweit...@gmail.com On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria davito...@gmail.comwrote: 2010/3/3 Philipp Wolfer ph.wol...@googlemail.com On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 12:43 PM, Frederic Da Vitoria davito...@gmail.com wrote: What do you think should we do in cases where only an official version exists? Should we link to it, or create a user-editable one, populate it with the official version, and link to that? I'm not sure that having an official version means we are legally allowed to copy it's contents to a user-editable web site. I thought that is what LyrciWiki is all about!? I don't know how laws work in every country in the world, but I'd be surprised if copying a copyrighted lyric to a publicly available web site wasn't forbidden somewhere. Isn't this really (now) a discussion of LyricWiki's own policies, not MusicBrainz's policies? I wasn't discussing preferring user-editable over official, I agree the first option would be statistically closer to the lyrics as they were actually sung. What surprised me was advising to copy copyrighted data, which seemed contradictory with the usual legal prudence in MB. But if, as Nicholas stated, they are paying royalties, then I guess everything is fine. -- 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
Re: [mb-style] Preferred lyrics for Has Lyrics At Relationship Type (community editable vs. Gracenote)
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 11:08 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria davito...@gmail.com wrote: I wasn't discussing preferring user-editable over official, I agree the first option would be statistically closer to the lyrics as they were actually sung. What surprised me was advising to copy copyrighted data, which seemed contradictory with the usual legal prudence in MB. But if, as Nicholas stated, they are paying royalties, then I guess everything is fine. That's the whole point why we are now able to have a has lyrics at AR. LyricWiki got a license to publish the lyrics on their websites, and MusicBrainz got permission to link there [1]. We don't have to discuss if we can link to the lyrics anymore, we just have to decide whether we link to the so-called official or user edited lyrics on LyricWiki. [1] http://blog.musicbrainz.org/?p=458 -- Philipp ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
[mb-style] A proposal has passed (was RFV: Live Bootleg Style, Live Track Style)
The allotted RFV period having passed without veto, this proposal has now passed. My week is a bit hectic until the weekend, but I'll make the needed wiki changes some time before the end of the week. Thanks everyone! Brian On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 12:04 AM, Brian Schweitzer brian.brianschweit...@gmail.com wrote: This proposal has now entered the RFV stage. Without veto, it will pass on 2010-03-03. On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 8:34 AM, Brian Schweitzer brian.brianschweit...@gmail.com wrote: Noone had had any negative comments when I'd asked about this last, back in the beginning of December, so let's give it a shot at RFC. These two proposals have been around for just about forever (2006-01-23 and 2006-04-03, respectively). They've both ended up in active use for several years now, even if they're unofficial and perhaps still have a few warts. Untitled Bootleg Style, on the other hand, which those would replace, has been essentially abandoned in favor of LBS, even if it is the official guideline (LBS entirely encompasses everything in UBS, plus adds the detail for more complex cases). Since this is the de facto reality anyhow, this RFC would make the de facto reality also the official reality; ie, eliminate UBS and make LBS and LTS official. Given the large amount of variation in bootlegs, kind of by definition, LBS and LTS both still likely can not be considered perfect, but at moving them from proposals to official, and getting rid of the unused Untitled Bootleg Style would make the documentation a little cleaner and more closely resemble reality. Without objection, this will go to RFV on Monday March 1, 2010. Brian ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
[mb-style] A proposal has passed (was RFV: proposed relationship release/track to url: has score at)
The allotted RFV period having passed without veto, this proposal has now passed. My week is a bit hectic until the weekend, but I'll make the needed wiki changes and create the ticket in jira to request adding the AR to the server some time before the end of the week. Thanks everyone! Brian On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 12:20 AM, Brian Schweitzer brian.brianschweit...@gmail.com wrote: Having seen no objections, and a week (actually, 9 days) having passed since the RFC, this proposal has entered RFV. Without objection, it will pass on 2010-03-03. This proposal is RFC-2. Brian On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 1:40 PM, mbuser838171846981 mbuser838171846...@fastmail.fm wrote: hello style list, having a relationship describing where to find the score for the music of a release or track is useful in analogy to having links to lyrics; especially users playing instruments themselves will appreciate this. by suggestion by nikki on irc, i created a proposal wiki page at [1] in the style (aka, copy/pasted) of the lyrics relationship [2] for a new Has Score At relationship type. i'd like to propose the relationship for discussion, and, finally, for inclusion in musicbrainz. concerning the legal status of sheet music, the relationship might have to be limited to domains where copyright is handled in a responsible way. the IMSLP project at [3] seems to be one of those sites, as detailed in the wiki page at [1]. regards mbuser838171846981 [1] http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Has_Score_At_Relationship_Type [2] http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Has_Lyrics_At_Relationship_Type [3] http://imslp.org/wiki/ ___ 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
Re: [mb-style] Still looking for Idea Champions - adopt an abandoned proposal today! :)
On Wed, 03 Mar 2010 18:21:08 +0100, Brian Schweitzer brian.brianschweit...@gmail.com wrote: RFC-79 Add release format: 10 vinyl RFC-80 Add release format: 12 vinyl RFC-78 Add release format: 7 vinyl I'd be happy to champion these, though I'm not sure if there's much point. Looking at the bug [1] there seems little will be done until sometime after the NGS release, which is understandable considering this will likely require quite a bit of restructuring to do right. Making an RFC that isn't really implementable (yet), and may have to change, seems a waste of time. Unless of course I'm mistaken about the difficulty of implementing this; I'd be happy if any devs could chime in. [1]: http://bugs.musicbrainz.org/ticket/3941 -- Per / Wizzcat ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] RFC: Add Has News Coverage At AR
On Feb 28, 2010, at 3:12 AM, Chad Wilson wrote: I'm reading two different concepts here. The original idea for Guardian in IRC talks about linking to tag/index pages on an artist, which might be sensible. The proposal as it reads, and the basic text of the relationship sounds like a free-for-all to link to individual articles, which I don't think would be a good idea. Which is it? Why is linking to individual news articles a problem? -- --ruaokThe answer to whether or not something is a good idea should not be taken as an indication of whether I want to do it. Robert Kaye -- r...@eorbit.net --http://mayhem-chaos.net ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] RFC: Add Has News Coverage At AR
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 4:54 PM, Robert Kaye r...@eorbit.net wrote: On Feb 28, 2010, at 3:12 AM, Chad Wilson wrote: I'm reading two different concepts here. The original idea for Guardian in IRC talks about linking to tag/index pages on an artist, which might be sensible. The proposal as it reads, and the basic text of the relationship sounds like a free-for-all to link to individual articles, which I don't think would be a good idea. Which is it? Why is linking to individual news articles a problem? -- --ruaokThe answer to whether or not something is a good idea should not be taken as an indication of whether I want to do it. I think the fear is there'd be tons of URLs linked, but without any context, those URLs don't give much, other than that you know there's some news article about the artist on the other end. However, if the AR description field could be displayed next to each URL AR for that type, that field would seem to work perfectly to address some of this concern and describe just what news article was on the other end of each such URL AR. Dev impact: It wouldn't really make sense to implement this type of description display on the current server code, but this would seem to entail only some minor additional template handling (specific to this AR type?) for the AR display page template on the NGS server. Plus, if it were added, esp universally, that so-far useless AR description field would actually now have some useful purpose. :) Brian ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
