Hi,
Since the only objection has been resolved and far more than 48 hours
have passed, I'm declaring this proposal passed. Thanks everyone.
Nikki
Nikki wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm sending this for Pete. The proposal is to add a relationship type
> to artists, releases and tracks for linking to free m
Pete Marsh wrote:
>
> hi
>
> my feeling is that video is outside the scope of this AR and that if
> video is included the AR becomes so generalised and vague as to be
> useless. there's already a youtube channel AR, isn't there? if that's
> not seen as adequate for outr YT needs then why not
Thanks nikki, the new wording works for me. I tweaked the template source a
tiny bit to move it down into the AR Guidelines section, rather than the
description section, for consistency with how all the other AR pages are
formatted - please feel free to revert if you disagree.
With the new wordin
I've changed the wording slightly and added a sentence saying it's not
intended for video streams. Can this pass now?
Nikki
brian.brianschweitzer wrote:
> Not to be picky, but one bit of language seems to remain from the whitelist,
> or at least, is a little confusing. "free streaming music ser
On Sep 3, 2010, at 5:44, Pete Marsh wrote:
> my feeling is that video is outside the scope of this AR and that if video
> is included the AR becomes so generalised and vague as to be useless. there's
> already a youtube channel AR, isn't there? if that's not seen as adequate
> for outr YT need
hi
my feeling is that video is outside the scope of this AR and that if
video is included the AR becomes so generalised and vague as to be
useless. there's already a youtube channel AR, isn't there? if that's
not seen as adequate for outr YT needs then why not expand or alter that
AR?
cheers
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 1:22 AM, jacobbrett wrote:
>
>
> Nikki-3 wrote:
> >
> > brian.brianschweitzer wrote:
> >> Also, 3 questions I still see outstanding. First, last.fm has
> streaming
> >> music, unless I'm mis-remembering something. Yet last.fm is on
> >> http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/What_No
Nikki-3 wrote:
>
> brian.brianschweitzer wrote:
>> Also, 3 questions I still see outstanding. First, last.fm has streaming
>> music, unless I'm mis-remembering something. Yet last.fm is on
>> http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/What_Not_To_Link_To#Last.fm - would otherwise
>> entirely valid AR links t
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 10:24 PM, Nikki wrote:
> brian.brianschweitzer wrote:
> > Also, 3 questions I still see outstanding. First, last.fm has streaming
> > music, unless I'm mis-remembering something. Yet last.fm is on
> > http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/What_Not_To_Link_To#Last.fm - would
> other
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 10:24 PM, Nikki wrote:
> brian.brianschweitzer wrote:
> > Also, 3 questions I still see outstanding. First, last.fm has streaming
> > music, unless I'm mis-remembering something. Yet last.fm is on
> > http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/What_Not_To_Link_To#Last.fm - would
> other
brian.brianschweitzer wrote:
> Also, 3 questions I still see outstanding. First, last.fm has streaming
> music, unless I'm mis-remembering something. Yet last.fm is on
> http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/What_Not_To_Link_To#Last.fm - would otherwise
> entirely valid AR links to stream pages at last.fm
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 21:54, Nikki wrote:
> Andrew Conkling wrote:
> > I'm pretty sure (but don't take my word for it) that last.fm's streams
> are
> > for subscribers only (others get 30-second samples of available tracks),
> but
> > that may vary based on the track. Either way, I don't know of
Andrew Conkling wrote:
> I'm pretty sure (but don't take my word for it) that last.fm's streams are
> for subscribers only (others get 30-second samples of available tracks), but
> that may vary based on the track. Either way, I don't know of a reliable way
> to tell, and without the full stream, I
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 20:37, brian.brianschweitzer <
brian.brianschweit...@gmail.com> wrote:
> First, last.fm has streaming music, unless I'm mis-remembering something.
> Yet last.fm is on http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/What_Not_To_Link_To#Last.fm -
> would otherwise entirely valid AR links to stre
Not to be picky, but one bit of language seems to remain from the whitelist,
or at least, is a little confusing. "free streaming music services" - could
'services' be perhaps changed to 'sites'? The current wording kind of
implies that the linked site has to be a service-type site, ala
Jamendo/we
Andrew Conkling wrote:
> I don't think this should stop the proceedings, but from the proposal:
> note - we7 URLs shouldn't include the unnecessary query string at the end.
>
>
> Couldn't this be handled the same way Amazon URLs are, i.e. to "sanitize"
> them automatically?
It could and should,
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 08:18, Nikki wrote:
> I'm sending this for Pete. The proposal is to add a relationship type to
> artists, releases and tracks for linking to free music streaming
> services. He removed the whitelist from the proposal last week and
> (after a bit of confusion) that seemed t
Hi,
I'm sending this for Pete. The proposal is to add a relationship type to
artists, releases and tracks for linking to free music streaming
services. He removed the whitelist from the proposal last week and
(after a bit of confusion) that seemed to satisfy people, so here's a
second RFV. It'
18 matches
Mail list logo
