Re: [mb-style] RFC-323: Live Attribute for Performed Relationship Type
It's been more than a week, you can send an RFV now.
Nikki
Michael Wiencek wrote:
This RFC is to add a live attribute to the recording-work performance of
relationship. It should expire on June 15.
There is a current revision at:
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Bitmap/Performed_Relationship_Type_Live_Attribute
As you can see, the attribute indicates that the recording is of a live
performance, and has the following short guideline:
Use the live attribute when the performance had an audience at the time it
occurred, i.e. it was not prerecorded.
The link phrases should ideally be ordered...
recording is a {live} {cover} performance of work
work has {live} {cover} performance recording
And the shorter versions:
{live} {cover} performance of: work
{live} {cover} performances: recordings
What I also wanted to do was use the date attributes to store the date of the
performance, but perhaps this should be discussed further. If there is wide
agreement to that, I can update the RFC or send a new one.
Michael
___
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] RFC-323: Live Attribute for Performed Relationship Type
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 7:15 PM, Michael Wiencek mwt...@gmail.com wrote:
This RFC is to add a live attribute to the recording-work performance of
relationship. It should expire on June 15.
There is a current revision at:
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Bitmap/Performed_Relationship_Type_Live_Attribute
As you can see, the attribute indicates that the recording is of a live
performance, and has the following short guideline:
Use the live attribute when the performance had an audience at the time it
occurred, i.e. it was not prerecorded.
The link phrases should ideally be ordered...
recording is a {live} {cover} performance of work
work has {live} {cover} performance recording
And the shorter versions:
{live} {cover} performance of: work
{live} {cover} performances: recordings
What I also wanted to do was use the date attributes to store the date of the
performance, but perhaps this should be discussed further. If there is wide
agreement to that, I can update the RFC or send a new one.
+1
Michael
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
--
Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] RFC-323: Live Attribute for Performed Relationship Type
2011/6/8, Michael Wiencek mwt...@gmail.com:
This RFC is to add a live attribute to the recording-work performance
of
relationship. It should expire on June 15.
There is a current revision at:
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Bitmap/Performed_Relationship_Type_Live_Attribute
As you can see, the attribute indicates that the recording is of a live
performance, and has the following short guideline:
Use the live attribute when the performance had an audience at the time it
occurred, i.e. it was not prerecorded.
The link phrases should ideally be ordered...
recording is a {live} {cover} performance of work
work has {live} {cover} performance recording
And the shorter versions:
{live} {cover} performance of: work
{live} {cover} performances: recordings
What I also wanted to do was use the date attributes to store the date of
the
performance, but perhaps this should be discussed further. If there is wide
agreement to that, I can update the RFC or send a new one.
+1 on the live attribute. I am not sure the date needs discussion
since the recording date would necessarily be the performance date.
--
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] RFC-323: Live Attribute for Performed Relationship Type
+1 here as well, would be great to differentiate pre-recorded
recording and live recordings (at least for POP, Jazz, Rock, etc...)
With classical, Opera, well, it's almost always Live, but I'm sure
there's exceptions
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 12:23 PM, Frederic Da Vitoria
davito...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/6/8, Michael Wiencek mwt...@gmail.com:
This RFC is to add a live attribute to the recording-work performance
of
relationship. It should expire on June 15.
There is a current revision at:
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Bitmap/Performed_Relationship_Type_Live_Attribute
As you can see, the attribute indicates that the recording is of a live
performance, and has the following short guideline:
Use the live attribute when the performance had an audience at the time it
occurred, i.e. it was not prerecorded.
The link phrases should ideally be ordered...
recording is a {live} {cover} performance of work
work has {live} {cover} performance recording
And the shorter versions:
{live} {cover} performance of: work
{live} {cover} performances: recordings
What I also wanted to do was use the date attributes to store the date of
the
performance, but perhaps this should be discussed further. If there is wide
agreement to that, I can update the RFC or send a new one.
+1 on the live attribute. I am not sure the date needs discussion
since the recording date would necessarily be the performance date.
--
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
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] RFC-323: Live Attribute for Performed Relationship Type
On Jun 8, 2011, at 11:23 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
2011/6/8, Michael Wiencek mwt...@gmail.com:
This RFC is to add a live attribute to the recording-work performance
of
relationship. It should expire on June 15.
There is a current revision at:
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Bitmap/Performed_Relationship_Type_Live_Attribute
As you can see, the attribute indicates that the recording is of a live
performance, and has the following short guideline:
Use the live attribute when the performance had an audience at the time it
occurred, i.e. it was not prerecorded.
The link phrases should ideally be ordered...
recording is a {live} {cover} performance of work
work has {live} {cover} performance recording
And the shorter versions:
{live} {cover} performance of: work
{live} {cover} performances: recordings
What I also wanted to do was use the date attributes to store the date of
the
performance, but perhaps this should be discussed further. If there is wide
agreement to that, I can update the RFC or send a new one.
+1 on the live attribute. I am not sure the date needs discussion
since the recording date would necessarily be the performance date.
That's my understanding as well. The only change I'd seek in regards to that is
replacing the there is no guideline yet for how the date fields might be
used (how it always was) with an actual guideline.
Michael
--
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
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] RFC-323: Live Attribute for Performed Relationship Type
On 06/08/2011 11:15 AM, Michael Wiencek wrote: This RFC is to add a live attribute to the recording-work performance of relationship. It should expire on June 15. Why a separate attribute rather than just storing it (along with the date if available, similar to Live Bootleg Style) in the comment field? —Alex Mauer “hawke” ___ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] RFC-323: Live Attribute for Performed Relationship Type
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 7:56 PM, Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net wrote: On 06/08/2011 11:15 AM, Michael Wiencek wrote: This RFC is to add a live attribute to the recording-work performance of relationship. It should expire on June 15. Why a separate attribute rather than just storing it (along with the date if available, similar to Live Bootleg Style) in the comment field? I think both things are useful. Some people might want to filter a recording list to exclude live recordings or to only show live recordings, and it's much easier to do this through attributes. That doesn't mean that all the specific info (date, place, etc) should not be added to the comment. —Alex Mauer “hawke” ___ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style -- Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren ___ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] RFC-323: Live Attribute for Performed Relationship Type
On Jun 8, 2011, at 11:56 AM, Alex Mauer wrote: On 06/08/2011 11:15 AM, Michael Wiencek wrote: This RFC is to add a live attribute to the recording-work performance of relationship. It should expire on June 15. Why a separate attribute rather than just storing it (along with the date if available, similar to Live Bootleg Style) in the comment field? —Alex Mauer “hawke” When a work has a hundred different recordings, it makes it much easier to view and manage the list because they are sorted and grouped by the link phrase. It also makes it simpler and more reliable to parse in my opinion, instead of having to search for these strings in a free text field. Michael ___ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] RFC-323: Live Attribute for Performed Relationship Type
On 06/08/2011 12:09 PM, Michael Wiencek wrote: When a work has a hundred different recordings, it makes it much easier to view and manage the list because they are sorted and grouped by the link phrase. Interesting, I think it makes it more difficult because you have to look in several different places to find the performance you’re looking for. Compare to Artist-Recording relationships, where you have all the various performance types (instruments, vocals, etc.)—it’s much harder to find one artist in the list without knowing in advance which role they were assigned. —Alex Mauer “hawke” ___ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] RFC-323: Live Attribute for Performed Relationship Type
On Jun 8, 2011, at 12:35 PM, Alex Mauer wrote: On 06/08/2011 12:09 PM, Michael Wiencek wrote: When a work has a hundred different recordings, it makes it much easier to view and manage the list because they are sorted and grouped by the link phrase. Interesting, I think it makes it more difficult because you have to look in several different places to find the performance you’re looking for. Compare to Artist-Recording relationships, where you have all the various performance types (instruments, vocals, etc.)—it’s much harder to find one artist in the list without knowing in advance which role they were assigned. —Alex Mauer “hawke” With recordings, I usually know beforehand if it's a live or cover version when I'm searching for a specific one. The groupings help me tremendously with that. Michael ___ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
