[mb-style] Founder of a group

2012-04-01 Thread Nikki
Hello,

Prompted by http://musicbrainz.org/edit/17114614, I'm wondering what 
other people think the definition of a founder is - is it simply any of 
the original members of the group, or specifically the person/people who 
decided to create the group?

If you think it's the latter definition, does anything change (for cases 
like that edit) when the person who decided to create the group was 
never actually a member themselves? (The members were chosen by auditions)

Someone asked a similar question a couple of years ago, but only got one 
response - 
http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/Founder-of-a-band-relationship-type-td1837775.html
 
- so I'm trying again in the hope of getting a slightly larger response 
this time. ;)

Nikki

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


Re: [mb-style] Founder of a group

2012-04-01 Thread Ian McEwen
On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 07:16:55AM +0200, Nikki wrote:
 Hello,

 Prompted by http://musicbrainz.org/edit/17114614, I'm wondering what
 other people think the definition of a founder is - is it simply any of
 the original members of the group, or specifically the person/people who
 decided to create the group?

 If you think it's the latter definition, does anything change (for cases
 like that edit) when the person who decided to create the group was
 never actually a member themselves? (The members were chosen by auditions)

I think it's the latter of your options; as I was stating earlier on IRC
I think that 'founder' and 'member' should be separate relationships,
the former being this person came up with the idea or some of the ideas
defining a group, or played a major role in bringing the group into
existence or something to that effect and the latter being the
more-mundane current relationship, i.e. this person performs or records
with the group on a regular basis (but don't quote either of those
descriptions in any proposals without at least some editing!).

Ideally, the interface should be set up so that adding a 'founder'
relationship is no more difficult than it currently is to add a founder
attribute to a 'member' relationship; perhaps this is the sort of thing
bitmap's SoC relationship editor can help solve.

For many/most groups, of course, the distinction doesn't need to be
made, since in most cases people don't found groups they won't be part
of. (This, of course, is why the interface concern is so important -- we
don't want to make the typical case harder for the average editor.)

Ideally some sort of support for generations (or some more general
form of member subgrouping) would also improve this situation, since as
HibiscusKazeneko rightly points out there isn't a way to track that
currently. Doing this right might easily be a schema change, though
(it'd be obnoxious to do with our current attribute system,
certainly...), so we can save that for a later discussion.

--
Ian McEwen ianmcorvi...@ianmcorvidae.net ih...@hampshire.edu
A262 D5C4 40CB 0E1C 5F24 C3A1 ABED 1ABD 7131 A76F
http://ianmcorvidae.net/


pgpN4y9wDWSUY.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style