On Pi, 2008-01-18 at 10:36 +0100, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
> What about "audio track" or "master track" instead of just "track"?
> Once again, if we use common or ambiguous terms for technical/abstract
> concepts, we confuse users and potentially even developers.
It's not technical or abstract
On Jan 18, 2008 10:29 AM, Lukáš Lalinský <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Pi, 2008-01-18 at 07:46 +0100, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
> > Please, IMO a track should be a track. You know, those chunks of
> > music which cd players number so conveniently while playing them and
> > which are usually li
On Pi, 2008-01-18 at 07:46 +0100, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
> Please, IMO a track should be a track. You know, those chunks of
> music which cd players number so conveniently while playing them and
> which are usually listed on the back of the sleeves :-) If we need
> another (more or less relate
On Jan 18, 2008 9:16 AM, Olivier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2008/1/18, Frederic Da Vitoria <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > On Jan 18, 2008 6:36 AM, Olivier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > It just happens that in some cases, the "work" is more accurately
> > > (mis)represented by the release rather tha
2008/1/18, Frederic Da Vitoria <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Jan 18, 2008 6:36 AM, Olivier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > 2008/1/18, Jim DeLaHunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > > Olivier-10 wrote:
> > > >
> > > > 2008/1/14, Jim DeLaHunt < [EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > >> Where this definition makes a diffe
On Jan 18, 2008 6:36 AM, Olivier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2008/1/18, Jim DeLaHunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Olivier-10 wrote:
> > >
> > > 2008/1/14, Jim DeLaHunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > >> Where this definition makes a difference for recent discussion is in
> what
> > >> ARs relating to Tracks
On Jan 18, 2008 2:56 AM, Jim DeLaHunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> You have a good point. I don't think a Track is equivalent to all of a
> specific work, or limited to just one work. Nor is it limited to all of a
> specific performance. This may mean that the definition of Track needs
> to
>
2008/1/18, Jim DeLaHunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Olivier-10 wrote:
> >
> > 2008/1/14, Jim DeLaHunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >> Where this definition makes a difference for recent discussion is in what
> >> ARs relating to Tracks mean. It's easy to see that a "Performed By"
> >> relationship between art
Olivier:
Thanks for your response. It's taken me a while to reply.
Olivier-10 wrote:
>
> 2008/1/14, Jim DeLaHunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> Where this definition makes a difference for recent discussion is in what
>> ARs relating to Tracks mean. It's easy to see that a "Performed By"
>> relation
I'm open to suggestions for better wording. I think the definition of "Track"
will be one of those things that appears simple, turns out to be deep and
difficult, and ends up being very clarifying and useful. Thank you pointing
out that we are entering the "deep and difficult" part.
Jan van Thi
Olivier wrote:
2008/1/15, Leiv Hellebo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Olivier wrote:
For example, if a unique
performance for some reason is splitted into multiple different
tracks, I definitely think it makes more sense to link the artist to
the release rather than to all individual "tracks".
Why are y
2008/1/15, Leiv Hellebo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Olivier wrote:
> > Back to your example:
> > What if a single track is released over the internet with liner notes
> > in the comment tag?
> > Or not even going that far, what if a release has different liner
> > notes each by different artists, one fo
2008/1/15, Leiv Hellebo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Olivier wrote:
> For example, if a unique
> > performance for some reason is splitted into multiple different
> > tracks, I definitely think it makes more sense to link the artist to
> > the release rather than to all individual "tracks".
>
> Why are y
Olivier wrote:
For example, if a unique
performance for some reason is splitted into multiple different
tracks, I definitely think it makes more sense to link the artist to
the release rather than to all individual "tracks".
Why are you so sure this is better?
If artist A plays on all splits/t
Olivier wrote:
Back to your example:
What if a single track is released over the internet with liner notes
in the comment tag?
Or not even going that far, what if a release has different liner
notes each by different artists, one for each track?
Just because almost every piece of metadata is rele
On Jan 14, 2008 10:40 PM, Olivier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "A Track is intended to represent a specific audio recording of a specific
> > musical performance.
A teacher of mine once said: 'specific is the most unspecific word there is" ;)
Jan
___
2008/1/14, Jim DeLaHunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Where this definition makes a difference for recent discussion is in what
> ARs relating to Tracks mean. It's easy to see that a "Performed By"
> relationship between artist A and the Track is meaningful.
It depends. Sometimes it's meaningless. For ex
What real-world entity does a Track represent?
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Track says, "In MusicBrainzTerminology, a track
is an entry in the track table of the database. It usually contains a single
song, but there are tracks with more than one song by the same artist, or
tracks with more than o
18 matches
Mail list logo
