Re: [mb-style] Step and half brother data. Do we really want this?

[Rachel Dwight]

> On Feb 2, 2015, at 6:50 AM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi! 
> 
> Ages ago (before my style time) an RFC passed to implement "step" and "half" 
> attributes for the sibling relationship, and "step" for the parent/child one. 
> This was never implemented, and there's a ticket for it still (well, 5...) at 
> http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-9 
> 
> 
> I personally feel this is overkill and have no interest in it, but do other 
> people feel this is useful?

I do; I even had plans to resurrect that proposal at one point.

> 
> -- 
> Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren
> ___
> 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] Step and half brother data. Do we really want this?

[Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren]

On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Rachel Dwight 
wrote:

>
> On Feb 2, 2015, at 6:50 AM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren <
> reosare...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> Ages ago (before my style time) an RFC passed to implement "step" and
> "half" attributes for the sibling relationship, and "step" for the
> parent/child one. This was never implemented, and there's a ticket for it
> still (well, 5...) at http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-9
>
> I personally feel this is overkill and have no interest in it, but do
> other people feel this is useful?
>
>
> I do; I even had plans to resurrect that proposal at one point.
>

Hmm, ok. It's easy to add, FWIW, so if one more person shows any interest I
guess I'll put it in.
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style

Re: [mb-style] Step and half brother data. Do we really want this?

[Tom Crocker]

Although I've not come across a need for it while editing, as a
step-brother  with step-parents they're (obviously) a different kind of
relationship but an important one. So I wouldn't use brother to mean
step-brother but think we should be able to represent it. I think it would
be odd to limit the relationships to biological ones.

On 2 February 2015 at 13:06, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren  wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Rachel Dwight 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Feb 2, 2015, at 6:50 AM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren <
>> reosare...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> Ages ago (before my style time) an RFC passed to implement "step" and
>> "half" attributes for the sibling relationship, and "step" for the
>> parent/child one. This was never implemented, and there's a ticket for it
>> still (well, 5...) at http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-9
>>
>> I personally feel this is overkill and have no interest in it, but do
>> other people feel this is useful?
>>
>>
>> I do; I even had plans to resurrect that proposal at one point.
>>
>
> Hmm, ok. It's easy to add, FWIW, so if one more person shows any interest
> I guess I'll put it in.
>
> ___
> 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] Step and half brother data. Do we really want this?

[SwissChris]

I think with Nicolás that this is overkill. I vividly remember the editor
who tried to add relationships for even the remotest theoretically
imaginable stuff – not only for family relationships, but for the vocal
tree (http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Proposal:Advanced_Vocal_Tree) and the
like. IMO all this will lead to cluttering the UIs with stuff barely ever
needed making editing even more difficult for new editors. If we start
this, we'll have Blood Brothers, Brothers in Arms and of course all kind of
adoptions (I'm not making this up, this was seriously discussed at the
time). Why can't we just use annotations for the rare cases where such a
thing occurs (and is relevant for the DB). Or let's do it like for the
instrument tree, where we use annotations until at least 5 actually
existing (and relevant) credits can be shown ;-)

On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 3:44 PM, Tom Crocker 
wrote:

> Although I've not come across a need for it while editing, as a
> step-brother  with step-parents they're (obviously) a different kind of
> relationship but an important one. So I wouldn't use brother to mean
> step-brother but think we should be able to represent it. I think it would
> be odd to limit the relationships to biological ones.
>
> On 2 February 2015 at 13:06, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren <
> reosare...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Rachel Dwight > > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Feb 2, 2015, at 6:50 AM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren <
>>> reosare...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> Ages ago (before my style time) an RFC passed to implement "step" and
>>> "half" attributes for the sibling relationship, and "step" for the
>>> parent/child one. This was never implemented, and there's a ticket for it
>>> still (well, 5...) at http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-9
>>>
>>> I personally feel this is overkill and have no interest in it, but do
>>> other people feel this is useful?
>>>
>>>
>>> I do; I even had plans to resurrect that proposal at one point.
>>>
>>
>> Hmm, ok. It's easy to add, FWIW, so if one more person shows any interest
>> I guess I'll put it in.
>>
>> ___
>> 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

Re: [mb-style] Step and half brother data. Do we really want this?

[Robert Bihlmeyer]

Hi,

Am 2015-02-02 um 13:50 schrieb Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren:
> Ages ago (before my style time) an RFC passed to implement "step" and
> "half" attributes for the sibling relationship, and "step" for the
> parent/child one.
a question I had on my mind for some time, that could have some impact 
on this: what is the policy on adding people that have no reasonable 
place in our database (i.e. never performed in any role related to 
music), but are useful as "relationship proxies"?

The case I came across was that a man and his grandfather are both 
musicians in MB, but the man's father is not. The grandfather 
relationship cannot (at the moment) be entered directly, but could be 
constructed by adding the father (not otherwise useful to us) and 
relating the other two to him via parent-child.

This would also make half-brother relationships superflous: you could 
just link both brothers to their shared parent. If X is the step-parent 
of Y, you could replace that with a marriage and a (normal) parent link 
via a new person Z.

Of course, some intelligence in software would be needed to show the 
transitive relationships. But that would be nice, anyway, so that "don't 
make relationship clusters" makes sense.

-- 
Robbe

___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style

Re: [mb-style] Step and half brother data. Do we really want this?

[Tom Crocker]

On 10 Feb 2015 21:42, "Robert Bihlmeyer"  wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Am 2015-02-02 um 13:50 schrieb Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren:
> > Ages ago (before my style time) an RFC passed to implement "step" and
> > "half" attributes for the sibling relationship, and "step" for the
> > parent/child one.
> a question I had on my mind for some time, that could have some impact
> on this: what is the policy on adding people that have no reasonable
> place in our database (i.e. never performed in any role related to
> music), but are useful as "relationship proxies"?
>
> The case I came across was that a man and his grandfather are both
> musicians in MB, but the man's father is not. The grandfather
> relationship cannot (at the moment) be entered directly, but could be
> constructed by adding the father (not otherwise useful to us) and
> relating the other two to him via parent-child.

Makes sense to me

>
> This would also make half-brother relationships superflous: you could
> just link both brothers to their shared parent. If X is the step-parent
> of Y, you could replace that with a marriage and a (normal) parent link
> via a new person Z.

Not just half brother, all sibling relationships, assuming you have enough
information about who the parents are ...

>
> Of course, some intelligence in software would be needed to show the
> transitive relationships. But that would be nice, anyway, so that "don't
> make relationship clusters" makes sense.
>
> --
> Robbe
>
> ___
> 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] Step and half brother data. Do we really want this?

[Ulrich Klauer]

Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:

> a question I had on my mind for some time, that could have some impact
> on this: what is the policy on adding people that have no reasonable
> place in our database (i.e. never performed in any role related to
> music), but are useful as "relationship proxies"?

I don't think there is an official style guideline about this (though  
I may be mistaken). I'd be fine with it, though. - There was some  
related discussion in the companion thread on the forums:  
http://forums.musicbrainz.org/viewtopic.php?id=5510

Ulrich (chirlu)


___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style

Re: [mb-style] Step and half brother data. Do we really want this?

[Robert Bihlmeyer]

Am 2015-02-10 um 23:37 schrieb Tom Crocker:
> On 10 Feb 2015 21:42, "Robert Bihlmeyer"  wrote:
>
>> This would also make half-brother relationships superflous: you could
>> just link both brothers to their shared parent. [...]
> Not just half brother, all sibling relationships, assuming you have enough
> information about who the parents are ...
>
Hmm, you could go full-monty and not only open the gates for 
non-musician-parents, but nameless ones as well.
Gary McGuy has parents Ebeneezer McGuy and Anonymous Female #38475
Andy McGuy has parents Ebeneezer McGuy and Anonymous Female #837212
Therefore they are step-brothers.

This would potentially triple the number of persons in the database.

-- 
Robbe

___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style

Re: [mb-style] Step and half brother data. Do we really want this?

[Robert Bihlmeyer]

Am 2015-02-10 um 22:42 schrieb Robert Bihlmeyer:
> Of course, some intelligence in software would be needed to show the
> transitive relationships. But that would be nice, anyway, so that "don't
> make relationship clusters" makes sense.
>
Regarding grandparent relationships, we have a fair number (more than 
100, IIRC) of them already in the database. Of those that I 
spot-checked, all three (child, parent, grandparent) were MB-relevant. 
The ones I still remember are Leopold, Wolfgang Amadeus, and Franz Xaver 
Wolfgang Mozart, as well as Benito Mussolini with his son and granddaughter.

Better software support that showed me that Leopold is the grandfather 
of Franz Xaver without me resorting to SQL would be desirable.

(There are also two families, where four generations are in our database...)

-- 
Robbe


___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style

Re: [mb-style] Step and half brother data. Do we really want this?

[Ulrich Klauer]

Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:

> Gary McGuy has parents Ebeneezer McGuy and Anonymous Female #38475
> Andy McGuy has parents Ebeneezer McGuy and Anonymous Female #837212
> Therefore they are step-brothers.

Half, not step.

> This would potentially triple the number of persons in the database.

As your own example shows, it would at most inflate the number by a  
factor of 2.5, not 3 (three parents for two half-siblings). Assuming  
every artist actually has a half-sibling artist, and exactly one,  
because otherwise the parents/children ratio gets lower; and further  
assuming none of the parents is an MB artist already. So, slightly  
unrealistic.

Ulrich


___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style