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 <tomcrockerm...@gmail.com> 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 <hibiscuskazen...@gmail.com >> > 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
